I have no use for macOS on iPad when my MacBook Air is a far better keyboard+trackpad combination that works anywhere including on my lap. I also have an iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard and find it very pleasant to use, except on my lap. The caveat being that when using the Magic Keyboard with my iPad Pro I'm running apps designed for iPad, not macOS. I cannot imagine using an iPad of any sort with XCode, but I'd guess that there are about 25-30 developers worldwide that would find it appealing. I do understand the use cases for doing small touch-ups or just running an editor, but again, the MacBook Pro and Air already have more than enough grunt for that sort of thing and have been doing it for a very long time. It's one thing to invest in a replacement, but quite another to invest in what is effectively a duplication of effort and expense unless the "XCode for iPad Pro" is fully sufficient for developers to use on the Mac.
I do think there is room for improvement in the iPadOS feature set, like file management. Like Netrox, I'm fully satisfied with the current multitasking on iPadOS, but if Apple made changes to improve multitasking to make more customers happy, I'd be fine with that too.
I also think there is one concession that Apple could make with iPadOS that would provide a better, if not perfect, rationale for Apple's two-device strategy. The concession would be to allow multiple users to share a single iPad. This would make the two-device strategy more palatable for some folks because the second device, the iPad, could provide shared utility for more than a single person. Passcode sharing, or much worse, sharing AppleID credentials across multiple users, is simply a recipe for disaster. But I also know that implementing multiple user accounts on iPadOS is by no means trivial. Even though iPads and Macs run on the same SoCs and are closely related from an OS standpoint, the software architectural elements of each version are still quite different, especially when it comes to multiple user accounts, scheduling/multitasking, running services, OS/kernel extensions, and backward compatibility.
Finally, from an iPad buyer's perspective, at least for mainstream iPad buyers, there has never been a need to be concerned about how much memory is installed in an iPad device. It just worked well with whatever it came with. Yeah, savvy buyers have discovered that they can obtain additional memory implicitly by spec'ing up their machine with certain options when ordering. But there has never been an ability for buyers to directly specify the amount of memory they want in their iPad. Adding these choices would certainly cost Apple more on the production and inventory side of their iPad business. They could absolutely handle it, like they do with the MacBook product line, but at some point in the grand convergence theory the choice between iPad or MacBook essentially comes down to whether you want an attached keyboard+trackpad or one of the loosely coupled stick-on keyboard+trackpad accessories. It's adios iPad at that point, which ends up being a longer lived and more completely implemented version of the Newton experiment, i.e., the SuperNewton.
When you have a 16" M1 Max MBP like I do, why in THE world do I need an iPad? I ask this as someone who has purchased more than one iPad in the past.
I am not an artist who needs to draw. I don't need Apple pencil. Therefore, why do I need an iPad which has a smaller screen than my 16" MBP and does less?
It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings.
One aspect that rarely gets mentioned in reviews is kids. It's the ideal first computer for kids and they use them all the time for games like Minecraft and Roblox. It's rare these days to hear about kids screaming on a plane and it's because of the iPad. The highest ranked apps in the store are entertainment and kids' games:
If someone doesn't draw, doesn't have young kids, doesn't read news in the bathroom, doesn't go on vacation, doesn't Facetime family or coworkers then the iPad has limited use for them but there are tens of millions of people it is useful for.
Apple sells 2-3x more iPads than Macs so quite a few people are finding a use for them:
"It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings." => This is true but then a super expensive iPad Pro is not required for such basic tasks. an iPad 10th gen or iPad Air will more than suffice. This is where a lot of the issues with the iPad Pro comes in. When you're paying for an iPad that can cost just as much, if not more (depending on configuration) than a MBP, iPadOS should be as capable as macOS on a device of this caliber.
When you have a 16" M1 Max MBP like I do, why in THE world do I need an iPad? I ask this as someone who has purchased more than one iPad in the past.
I am not an artist who needs to draw. I don't need Apple pencil. Therefore, why do I need an iPad which has a smaller screen than my 16" MBP and does less?
It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings.
One aspect that rarely gets mentioned in reviews is kids. It's the ideal first computer for kids and they use them all the time for games like Minecraft and Roblox. It's rare these days to hear about kids screaming on a plane and it's because of the iPad. The highest ranked apps in the store are entertainment and kids' games:
If someone doesn't draw, doesn't have young kids, doesn't read news in the bathroom, doesn't go on vacation, doesn't Facetime family or coworkers then the iPad has limited use for them but there are tens of millions of people it is useful for.
Apple sells 2-3x more iPads than Macs so quite a few people are finding a use for them:
"It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings." => This is true but then a super expensive iPad Pro is not required for such basic tasks. an iPad 10th gen or iPad Air will more than suffice. This is where a lot of the issues with the iPad Pro comes in. When you're paying for an iPad that can cost just as much, if not more (depending on configuration) than a MBP, iPadOS should be as capable as macOS on a device of this caliber.
It depends, some people use an iPad as their only computer because their computing needs don't go beyond browsing, online shopping, email, social media, photos, webcam, document editing.
For someone who has it as their only device, they'd probably want a lot of storage and the base model iPad tops out at 256GB.
An 11" iPad Pro 1TB is $1599. That's not super expensive when it's used as someone's only computer, especially if it's used for 7+ years and the OLED display is nicer than the IPS display in the Air. It may not be worth $500 more than the Air for everyone but $1599 isn't that expensive in general for someone's main device.
The “reviews saying that iPadOS limitations mean the new iPad Pro can't easily replace a MacBook Pro” feel like they are recycled, repeating something that appears in the reviews every time a new iPad is released. The iPad was never meant to be a laptop, and it’s a great device when it meets your needs.
In these criticisms, treat "Laptop" or "MacBook" as shorthand for a portable computer that can be used ad hoc when away from your focused work location (not even assuming that location has a non-portable computer, and the ad-hoc device is still there to sideline distractions).
Why can't an iPad replace that? - Hardware is capable - Hardware can be extended to be more capable of niche tasks. - Software? nope, it cannot be extended to be more capable of niche tasks.
This isn't about Apple trying to get you to buy 2 devices it is them trying to get you to buy 3. Desktop - Laptop - Pad If iPadOS were more capable, you wouldn't need two portable computers, just the one with the best form factor for you. (This is currently true of MacBooks but not iPads.)
I'm sure we will hear the same discussion again in 5-10years when VisionPro matures into almost being able to replace the focused work location device completely for many people. (after all we heard it Apple ][ to Mac, Desktop to Laptop, dumb phone to smart phone, landline to mobile)
It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings. One aspect that rarely gets mentioned in reviews is kids. Apple sells 2-3x more iPads than Macs so quite a few people are finding a use for them
I read your reply with an open mind, but I use my iPhone 15 Pro Max "in the bathroom" to read news, and if I go on a trip, I will without a doubt need my computer, not merely iOS or iPadOS. So if I take my 16" MBP, I don't need an iPad. I will have my iPhone too, so in cases where my MBP is too large, my iPhone works. The iPad sits in a strange place that lacks absolute need in my home, and I say this having purchased two iPads in the past. In other words, I speak from experience. And just because a lot of people buy iPads, what they do doesn't magically make my situation different.
When FaceTiming, I sometimes need to send files, and almost always I need to jump on my Mac to do that, so if I am already on my Mac, it's even better.
Kids. Yes. That is why I purchased two iPads in the past. But guess what? Kids grow up and move out. Then where's the need for more iPads in the home in which there once were kids?
I've already explained why I am finding it hard to choose the iPad. But I want Apple to give PEOPLE LIKE ME (not all those other people you mentioned who buy iPads) a reason to buy an iPad. SHOW ME THE NEED FOR MY SITUATION. It's not that difficult. Right now, current iPads don't fill that need. It's not the end of the world though. It's just a fact. And it shows THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. That's a good thing. If Apple eventually does recognize would-be buyers like me, the iPad stands to only get much, MUCH better.
Apple has the wrong priorities. They keep producing faster iPads, but speed/performance is a non-issue. The iPadOS software is the blocking factor. I am done with Apple in the incremental update mode producing no significant meaningfull improvements. iPad is not a laptop replacement at this moment. I am done with the iPad with iPadOS and prefer to have a touch screen laptop with Mac OS instead. Let’s move on.
"It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings." => This is true but then a super expensive iPad Pro is not required for such basic tasks. an iPad 10th gen or iPad Air will more than suffice. This is where a lot of the issues with the iPad Pro comes in. When you're paying for an iPad that can cost just as much, if not more (depending on configuration) than a MBP, iPadOS should be as capable as macOS on a device of this caliber.
It depends, some people use an iPad as their only computer because their computing needs don't go beyond browsing, online shopping, email, social media, photos, webcam, document editing.
For someone who has it as their only device, they'd probably want a lot of storage and the base model iPad tops out at 256GB.
An 11" iPad Pro 1TB is $1599. That's not super expensive when it's used as someone's only computer, especially if it's used for 7+ years and the OLED display is nicer than the IPS display in the Air. It may not be worth $500 more than the Air for everyone but $1599 isn't that expensive in general for someone's main device.
You’re kind of talking out of both sides of your mouth - first saying the iPad has different uses then saying people are using it as a laptop replacement.
The “reviews saying that iPadOS limitations mean the new iPad Pro can't easily replace a MacBook Pro” feel like they are recycled, repeating something that appears in the reviews every time a new iPad is released. The iPad was never meant to be a laptop, and it’s a great device when it meets your needs.
In these criticisms, treat "Laptop" or "MacBook" as shorthand for a portable computer that can be used ad hoc when away from your focused work location (not even assuming that location has a non-portable computer, and the ad-hoc device is still there to sideline distractions).
Why can't an iPad replace that? - Hardware is capable - Hardware can be extended to be more capable of niche tasks. - Software? nope, it cannot be extended to be more capable of niche tasks.
This isn't about Apple trying to get you to buy 2 devices it is them trying to get you to buy 3. Desktop - Laptop - iPad[edit: 4 devices if you include an iphone!] If iPadOS were more capable, you wouldn't need two portable computers, just the one with the best form factor for you. (This is currently true of MacBooks but not iPads.)
I'm sure we will hear the same discussion again in 5-10years when VisionPro matures into almost being able to replace the focused work location device completely for many people. (after all we heard it Apple ][ to Mac, Desktop to Laptop, dumb phone to smart phone, landline to mobile)
Exactly. Apple continues to push the hardware capabilities of the iPad while inexplicably crippling the software.
I have both an iPad and a MacBook. I find myself using both but most often, the times I use my MacBook are not because I need more speed or better hardware, rather it’s because MacOS makes it easier to do what I need. There are also apps that are only available for MacOS or iPad OS that make me choose one or the other.
Like many people, I don’t have great computing power needs. Email, word processing, Quicken, light PDF editing, etc. All of this is easily handled by the M2 processor, just not iPadOS. Other tasks can be done but are not nearly as easily accomplished on iPadOS.
I can’t say for sure but it does seem like Apple is intentionally crippling or hindering iPadOS development so as not to eat in to its laptop sales, but that seems like it’s exactly opposite of the ‘insanely great’ that Steve Jobs always strove for.
It's frustrating when the question is when the Mac will get a touchscreen, or when the iPad can run macOS. I'd prefer to ask when iPadOS will get better multitasking, a better audio subsystem, a Terminal app, a VM app, a better filesystem app, a better virtual keyboard, a virtual trackpad, better text selection, etc. So, a touch first OS with more functionality.
The enhancements you mentioned would require Apple to integrate many features from macOS into iPadOS. However, I'm not certain they will do so, given their intention to maintain distinct environments. If this remains true, then iPadOS may always have more limitations compared to macOS.
When you have a 16" M1 Max MBP like I do, why in THE world do I need an iPad? I ask this as someone who has purchased more than one iPad in the past.
I am not an artist who needs to draw. I don't need Apple pencil. Therefore, why do I need an iPad which has a smaller screen than my 16" MBP and does less?
It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings.
One aspect that rarely gets mentioned in reviews is kids. It's the ideal first computer for kids and they use them all the time for games like Minecraft and Roblox. It's rare these days to hear about kids screaming on a plane and it's because of the iPad. The highest ranked apps in the store are entertainment and kids' games:
If someone doesn't draw, doesn't have young kids, doesn't read news in the bathroom, doesn't go on vacation, doesn't Facetime family or coworkers then the iPad has limited use for them but there are tens of millions of people it is useful for.
Apple sells 2-3x more iPads than Macs so quite a few people are finding a use for them:
"It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings." => This is true but then a super expensive iPad Pro is not required for such basic tasks. an iPad 10th gen or iPad Air will more than suffice. This is where a lot of the issues with the iPad Pro comes in. When you're paying for an iPad that can cost just as much, if not more (depending on configuration) than a MBP, iPadOS should be as capable as macOS on a device of this caliber.
It depends, some people use an iPad as their only computer because their computing needs don't go beyond browsing, online shopping, email, social media, photos, webcam, document editing.
For someone who has it as their only device, they'd probably want a lot of storage and the base model iPad tops out at 256GB.
An 11" iPad Pro 1TB is $1599. That's not super expensive when it's used as someone's only computer, especially if it's used for 7+ years and the OLED display is nicer than the IPS display in the Air. It may not be worth $500 more than the Air for everyone but $1599 isn't that expensive in general for someone's main device.
IMO, a $1600 11" iPad Pro is a lot of money for the tasks you mentioned. They iPad Air is a better option.
It's frustrating when the question is when the Mac will get a touchscreen, or when the iPad can run macOS. I'd prefer to ask when iPadOS will get better multitasking, a better audio subsystem, a Terminal app, a VM app, a better filesystem app, a better virtual keyboard, a virtual trackpad, better text selection, etc. So, a touch first OS with more functionality.
The enhancements you mentioned would require Apple to integrate many features from macOS into iPadOS. However, I'm not certain they will do so, given their intention to maintain distinct environments. If this remains true, then iPadOS may always have more limitations compared to macOS.
Those features are not unique macOS. They are just your average set of operating system features since the 1990s. All the stuff is actually inside the kernel and userland since the beginning. It's just been limited by design policy. Everything below the API level is just about 99% the same code, with the aforementioned design policies. IOW, macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, watchOS, visionOS, all have the same operating system underpinnings: DarwinOS or Xnu, a Mach microkernel with BSD userland, capable of unlimited multitasking.
Is it as simple as just changing the value or values to implement the design policies? Probably not, but it isn't going to be something super complicated either. Unlimited background tasking is the easiest as that is just a timer right now I think. A VM app is a matter of putting the hypervisor framework back in and making it shippable. It was in betas I think a while back. The hardest part is probably making amfile, audio and video subsystem that can securely move through the sandboxes.
It works better for some scenarios like reading news in the bathroom, watching movies on a plane, for taking on vacation, for swiping through photo albums, it works better when relaxing on a sofa, Facetiming family or work meetings. One aspect that rarely gets mentioned in reviews is kids. Apple sells 2-3x more iPads than Macs so quite a few people are finding a use for them
I read your reply with an open mind, but I use my iPhone 15 Pro Max "in the bathroom" to read news, and if I go on a trip, I will without a doubt need my computer, not merely iOS or iPadOS. So if I take my 16" MBP, I don't need an iPad. I will have my iPhone too, so in cases where my MBP is too large, my iPhone works. The iPad sits in a strange place that lacks absolute need in my home, and I say this having purchased two iPads in the past. In other words, I speak from experience. And just because a lot of people buy iPads, what they do doesn't magically make my situation different.
When FaceTiming, I sometimes need to send files, and almost always I need to jump on my Mac to do that, so if I am already on my Mac, it's even better.
Kids. Yes. That is why I purchased two iPads in the past. But guess what? Kids grow up and move out. Then where's the need for more iPads in the home in which there once were kids?
I've already explained why I am finding it hard to choose the iPad. But I want Apple to give PEOPLE LIKE ME (not all those other people you mentioned who buy iPads) a reason to buy an iPad. SHOW ME THE NEED FOR MY SITUATION. It's not that difficult. Right now, current iPads don't fill that need. It's not the end of the world though. It's just a fact. And it shows THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. That's a good thing. If Apple eventually does recognize would-be buyers like me, the iPad stands to only get much, MUCH better.
Sounds like you don't need to buy an iPad. We are not here to convince you to get one.
For me, I love my iPad Pro 10.5. Super mobile; convenient to draw on, annotate and sign things; great to use in bed, coach, car and whatnot. Great to read books and comics on. Great watch videos and web browse on. It's fun to use.
Gruber says we're thinking about it wrong. (are we holding it wrong, too?) He posits that the point of the M4 iPad Pro is not for speed or power but for efficiency; it allows for better battery life for a given set of features. Ok, let's assume that's true well, the M4 iPad Pro allows for 10 hours of battery life. But the M2 iPad Air also gives 10 hours of battery life. "But wait!" you say, the iPad Pro is thinner! That it is, 5.1 instead of 6.1 mm. So we need all that power to save 1mm?
Gruber says we're thinking about it wrong. (are we holding it wrong, too?) He posits that the point of the M4 iPad Pro is not for speed or power but for efficiency; it allows for better battery life for a given set of features. Ok, let's assume that's true well, the M4 iPad Pro allows for 10 hours of battery life. But the M2 iPad Air also gives 10 hours of battery life. "But wait!" you say, the iPad Pro is thinner! That it is, 5.1 instead of 6.1 mm. So we need all that power to save 1mm?
Sorry, not buying it.
That's not actually what he's saying. To use Steve Jobs' car / truck analogy => power users / techies want the iPad Pro to behave like a truck (ie: Mac) but Apple's positioning it more like a luxury car, which essentially does everything a regular car does but only nicer and better. To put it another way, the iPad / iPad Air are akin to Toyotas while the iPad Pro is akin to a Lexus.
It's frustrating when the question is when the Mac will get a touchscreen, or when the iPad can run macOS. I'd prefer to ask when iPadOS will get better multitasking, a better audio subsystem, a Terminal app, a VM app, a better filesystem app, a better virtual keyboard, a virtual trackpad, better text selection, etc. So, a touch first OS with more functionality.
The enhancements you mentioned would require Apple to integrate many features from macOS into iPadOS. However, I'm not certain they will do so, given their intention to maintain distinct environments. If this remains true, then iPadOS may always have more limitations compared to macOS.
Those features are not unique macOS. They are just your average set of operating system features since the 1990s. All the stuff is actually inside the kernel and userland since the beginning. It's just been limited by design policy. Everything below the API level is just about 99% the same code, with the aforementioned design policies. IOW, macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, watchOS, visionOS, all have the same operating system underpinnings: DarwinOS or Xnu, a Mach microkernel with BSD userland, capable of unlimited multitasking.
Is it as simple as just changing the value or values to implement the design policies? Probably not, but it isn't going to be something super complicated either. Unlimited background tasking is the easiest as that is just a timer right now I think. A VM app is a matter of putting the hypervisor framework back in and making it shippable. It was in betas I think a while back. The hardest part is probably making amfile, audio and video subsystem that can securely move through the sandboxes.
I agree with you. My point is that, even though iPadOS and macOS are similar (maybe the same) under the hood, Apple want to keep iPadOS and macOS for different devices. The problem Apple will have is how long they can keep iPadOS limited compared to macOS. I think we are reaching peak iPadOS, and at some point, they just will have to add macOS elements, like full multitasking, multiples user profiles and even Finder to improve it.
As today, the iPad Pro is the best tablet in the market but is a bad notebook, considering its limitations compared to macOS. Apple just made the iPad Pro the device they criticized many years ago, the "toaster / fridge" device.
It's frustrating when the question is when the Mac will get a touchscreen, or when the iPad can run macOS. I'd prefer to ask when iPadOS will get better multitasking, a better audio subsystem, a Terminal app, a VM app, a better filesystem app, a better virtual keyboard, a virtual trackpad, better text selection, etc. So, a touch first OS with more functionality.
The enhancements you mentioned would require Apple to integrate many features from macOS into iPadOS. However, I'm not certain they will do so, given their intention to maintain distinct environments. If this remains true, then iPadOS may always have more limitations compared to macOS.
Those features are not unique macOS. They are just your average set of operating system features since the 1990s. All the stuff is actually inside the kernel and userland since the beginning. It's just been limited by design policy. Everything below the API level is just about 99% the same code, with the aforementioned design policies. IOW, macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, watchOS, visionOS, all have the same operating system underpinnings: DarwinOS or Xnu, a Mach microkernel with BSD userland, capable of unlimited multitasking.
Is it as simple as just changing the value or values to implement the design policies? Probably not, but it isn't going to be something super complicated either. Unlimited background tasking is the easiest as that is just a timer right now I think. A VM app is a matter of putting the hypervisor framework back in and making it shippable. It was in betas I think a while back. The hardest part is probably making amfile, audio and video subsystem that can securely move through the sandboxes.
I agree with you. My point is that, even though iPadOS and macOS are similar (maybe the same) under the hood, Apple want to keep iPadOS and macOS for different devices. The problem Apple will have is how long they can keep iPadOS limited compared to macOS. I think we are reaching peak iPadOS, and at some point, they just will have to add macOS elements, like full multitasking, multiples user profiles and even Finder to improve it.
As today, the iPad Pro is the best tablet in the market but is a bad notebook, considering its limitations compared to macOS. Apple just made the iPad Pro the device they criticized many years ago, the "toaster / fridge" device.
Arguably, an iPad can be configured to be a fine notebook. My daughter used a 2020 iPP11 with MK and Pencil the last four years, and she loves it. She uses it for the entire gamut: handwritten notes (it's impressive), drawings, a video and messaging system (Slide Over all the time), and makes videos with it. Feels naked without it.
I would reframe the criticisms of iPadOS as a "what it means to be a good user experience" question. Apple's design choices for iPadOS are making for poor user experience on the high end of the product line. Things like app termination or memory evictions, the limited multitasking, and the lack of apps and app features make for poor user experiences. The freeze drying of apps isn't implemented well in all the apps, causing an app having to start in a brand new state instead of where the user left it is not a good user experience. Not having full background tasking is also a poor user experience as you can't leave an app running to do whatever it needs to do.
Not having equivalently featured apps make it a more unpleasant experience. MS Office on iPads has to be featured enough that you can intermix files between Windows, macOS and iPadOS. Not really there yet. At least you can blame MS there. Even Apple doesn't put a macOS feature equivalent Safari on iPadOS (this might be a Safari on iPP10.5 issue?). Sometimes there is a weird incompatibility from websites on iPadOS Safari. iWork apps also have differences in features between macOS and iPadOS. There's always a frustrating missing feature.
Apple can improve iPadOS if they wanted to. visionOS is based off iPadOS, and it's an unlimited tasking system. It does need Terminal.app just like iPadOS needs it. I digress. Apple can use visionOS' realtime frameworks on iOS to guarantee UI responsiveness. This can enable unlimited background tasking. They can limit background apps to only using the e-cores. They can control what apps are allowed to use the p-cores while in the background. They can improve iPadOS's windowing UI.
They really have to endeavor to do it all. Set up the system so that novice and proficient users can use it well.
Gruber says we're thinking about it wrong. (are we holding it wrong, too?) He posits that the point of the M4 iPad Pro is not for speed or power but for efficiency; it allows for better battery life for a given set of features. Ok, let's assume that's true well, the M4 iPad Pro allows for 10 hours of battery life. But the M2 iPad Air also gives 10 hours of battery life. "But wait!" you say, the iPad Pro is thinner! That it is, 5.1 instead of 6.1 mm. So we need all that power to save 1mm?
Sorry, not buying it.
That's not actually what he's saying. To use Steve Jobs' car / truck analogy => power users / techies want the iPad Pro to behave like a truck (ie: Mac) but Apple's positioning it more like a luxury car, which essentially does everything a regular car does but only nicer and better. To put it another way, the iPad / iPad Air are akin to Toyotas while the iPad Pro is akin to a Lexus.
That’s only half of what he said (“‘pro’ can mean ‘professional’ or ‘deluxe.’”) That part I don’t disagree with - if you wan’t to pay for the features, fine.
The other half is what I posted and the argument doesn’t hold water. The extension is the fact that iPadOS doesn’t even use all the capabilities of the M1 processor much less the M4. Essentially, Apple has $1500 worth of hardware crippled to $500 worth of functionality.
Gruber says we're thinking about it wrong. (are we holding it wrong, too?) He posits that the point of the M4 iPad Pro is not for speed or power but for efficiency; it allows for better battery life for a given set of features. Ok, let's assume that's true well, the M4 iPad Pro allows for 10 hours of battery life. But the M2 iPad Air also gives 10 hours of battery life. "But wait!" you say, the iPad Pro is thinner! That it is, 5.1 instead of 6.1 mm. So we need all that power to save 1mm?
Sorry, not buying it.
That's not actually what he's saying. To use Steve Jobs' car / truck analogy => power users / techies want the iPad Pro to behave like a truck (ie: Mac) but Apple's positioning it more like a luxury car, which essentially does everything a regular car does but only nicer and better. To put it another way, the iPad / iPad Air are akin to Toyotas while the iPad Pro is akin to a Lexus.
iPadOS doesn’t even use all the capabilities of the M1 processor much less the M4. Essentially, Apple has $1500 worth of hardware crippled to $500 worth of functionality.
It uses the power when encoding/editing/rendering video, when playing games and it will use it for AI tasks.
It could be used for more but it's not straightforward on how to deliver more. Just running macOS instead of iPadOS isn't the answer, that's just creating a netbook-like equivalent. MacOS and Mac apps aren't optimal for a device with 8GB RAM and no memory swapping. A windowed UI doesn't scale well for an 11" display, even less with an on-screen keyboard.
Even if that could be looked past, they'd have to figure out how to install and boot it up, whether it's dual boot with iPadOS or replaces it, meaning it's no longer a mobile device, it's a touch-based laptop.
It's easy to test this today using Sidecar, macOS isn't user-friendly with just touch and a small display.
It could work as a mode inside iPadOS where it's like an app that launches into a Mac environment and runs Mac apps without rebooting into a separate OS. The touch screen would then be used for click input and swiping out of the environment. When connected to a large display, it would be like using a Mac mini.
Or they could keep improving iPadOS but a fundamental difference would be allowing apps to be installed from anywhere. That's a key feature of a Mac, being able to build apps on it, install tools from anywhere and have full access to the filesystem.
Then comes the question of why to make a MacPad. If someone already owned a Mac, what scenario would make them put the Mac away and do the same tasks on a smaller screen device? A MacPad has appeal for people who use it as their only device because it fills in missing functionality from iPadOS but it's not clear why someone who already owns a Mac would buy one. For drawing perhaps but this can be done with Sidecar.
Given that Apple sells so many iPads and they are the best-selling tablet all while touch laptops are available suggests people don't want touch laptops in large numbers. There's an appeal for some but it's very limited appeal to the point that it doesn't make sense for Apple to design the product around it. Adding it as an extra feature would be enough and it could even be done with a virtual machine app like Parallels as long as the performance hit was minimal. Apple could partner with Parallels to make a fast Mac VM environment for iPadOS. Apple can then see the ways that people use the Mac part and improve iPadOS accordingly.
Comments
I do think there is room for improvement in the iPadOS feature set, like file management. Like Netrox, I'm fully satisfied with the current multitasking on iPadOS, but if Apple made changes to improve multitasking to make more customers happy, I'd be fine with that too.
I also think there is one concession that Apple could make with iPadOS that would provide a better, if not perfect, rationale for Apple's two-device strategy. The concession would be to allow multiple users to share a single iPad. This would make the two-device strategy more palatable for some folks because the second device, the iPad, could provide shared utility for more than a single person. Passcode sharing, or much worse, sharing AppleID credentials across multiple users, is simply a recipe for disaster. But I also know that implementing multiple user accounts on iPadOS is by no means trivial. Even though iPads and Macs run on the same SoCs and are closely related from an OS standpoint, the software architectural elements of each version are still quite different, especially when it comes to multiple user accounts, scheduling/multitasking, running services, OS/kernel extensions, and backward compatibility.
Finally, from an iPad buyer's perspective, at least for mainstream iPad buyers, there has never been a need to be concerned about how much memory is installed in an iPad device. It just worked well with whatever it came with. Yeah, savvy buyers have discovered that they can obtain additional memory implicitly by spec'ing up their machine with certain options when ordering. But there has never been an ability for buyers to directly specify the amount of memory they want in their iPad. Adding these choices would certainly cost Apple more on the production and inventory side of their iPad business. They could absolutely handle it, like they do with the MacBook product line, but at some point in the grand convergence theory the choice between iPad or MacBook essentially comes down to whether you want an attached keyboard+trackpad or one of the loosely coupled stick-on keyboard+trackpad accessories. It's adios iPad at that point, which ends up being a longer lived and more completely implemented version of the Newton experiment, i.e., the SuperNewton.
For someone who has it as their only device, they'd probably want a lot of storage and the base model iPad tops out at 256GB.
An 11" iPad Pro 1TB is $1599. That's not super expensive when it's used as someone's only computer, especially if it's used for 7+ years and the OLED display is nicer than the IPS display in the Air. It may not be worth $500 more than the Air for everyone but $1599 isn't that expensive in general for someone's main device.
Why can't an iPad replace that?
- Hardware is capable
- Hardware can be extended to be more capable of niche tasks.
- Software? nope, it cannot be extended to be more capable of niche tasks.
This isn't about Apple trying to get you to buy 2 devices it is them trying to get you to buy 3.
Desktop - Laptop - Pad
If iPadOS were more capable, you wouldn't need two portable computers, just the one with the best form factor for you. (This is currently true of MacBooks but not iPads.)
I'm sure we will hear the same discussion again in 5-10years when VisionPro matures into almost being able to replace the focused work location device completely for many people.
(after all we heard it Apple ][ to Mac, Desktop to Laptop, dumb phone to smart phone, landline to mobile)
lighter
has a better screen
better processors
5G
touch screen
When FaceTiming, I sometimes need to send files, and almost always I need to jump on my Mac to do that, so if I am already on my Mac, it's even better.
Kids. Yes. That is why I purchased two iPads in the past. But guess what? Kids grow up and move out. Then where's the need for more iPads in the home in which there once were kids?
I've already explained why I am finding it hard to choose the iPad. But I want Apple to give PEOPLE LIKE ME (not all those other people you mentioned who buy iPads) a reason to buy an iPad. SHOW ME THE NEED FOR MY SITUATION. It's not that difficult. Right now, current iPads don't fill that need. It's not the end of the world though. It's just a fact. And it shows THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. That's a good thing. If Apple eventually does recognize would-be buyers like me, the iPad stands to only get much, MUCH better.
Exactly. Apple continues to push the hardware capabilities of the iPad while inexplicably crippling the software.
I have both an iPad and a MacBook. I find myself using both but most often, the times I use my MacBook are not because I need more speed or better hardware, rather it’s because MacOS makes it easier to do what I need. There are also apps that are only available for MacOS or iPad OS that make me choose one or the other.
Like many people, I don’t have great computing power needs. Email, word processing, Quicken, light PDF editing, etc. All of this is easily handled by the M2 processor, just not iPadOS. Other tasks can be done but are not nearly as easily accomplished on iPadOS.
I can’t say for sure but it does seem like Apple is intentionally crippling or hindering iPadOS development so as not to eat in to its laptop sales, but that seems like it’s exactly opposite of the ‘insanely great’ that Steve Jobs always strove for.
Daring Fireball: The M4 iPad Pros
Is it as simple as just changing the value or values to implement the design policies? Probably not, but it isn't going to be something super complicated either. Unlimited background tasking is the easiest as that is just a timer right now I think. A VM app is a matter of putting the hypervisor framework back in and making it shippable. It was in betas I think a while back. The hardest part is probably making amfile, audio and video subsystem that can securely move through the sandboxes.
For me, I love my iPad Pro 10.5. Super mobile; convenient to draw on, annotate and sign things; great to use in bed, coach, car and whatnot. Great to read books and comics on. Great watch videos and web browse on. It's fun to use.
I plan on spending $2700 on 2024 iPad Pro 13.
Sorry, not buying it.
As today, the iPad Pro is the best tablet in the market but is a bad notebook, considering its limitations compared to macOS. Apple just made the iPad Pro the device they criticized many years ago, the "toaster / fridge" device.
I would reframe the criticisms of iPadOS as a "what it means to be a good user experience" question. Apple's design choices for iPadOS are making for poor user experience on the high end of the product line. Things like app termination or memory evictions, the limited multitasking, and the lack of apps and app features make for poor user experiences. The freeze drying of apps isn't implemented well in all the apps, causing an app having to start in a brand new state instead of where the user left it is not a good user experience. Not having full background tasking is also a poor user experience as you can't leave an app running to do whatever it needs to do.
Not having equivalently featured apps make it a more unpleasant experience. MS Office on iPads has to be featured enough that you can intermix files between Windows, macOS and iPadOS. Not really there yet. At least you can blame MS there. Even Apple doesn't put a macOS feature equivalent Safari on iPadOS (this might be a Safari on iPP10.5 issue?). Sometimes there is a weird incompatibility from websites on iPadOS Safari. iWork apps also have differences in features between macOS and iPadOS. There's always a frustrating missing feature.
Apple can improve iPadOS if they wanted to. visionOS is based off iPadOS, and it's an unlimited tasking system. It does need Terminal.app just like iPadOS needs it. I digress. Apple can use visionOS' realtime frameworks on iOS to guarantee UI responsiveness. This can enable unlimited background tasking. They can limit background apps to only using the e-cores. They can control what apps are allowed to use the p-cores while in the background. They can improve iPadOS's windowing UI.
They really have to endeavor to do it all. Set up the system so that novice and proficient users can use it well.
The other half is what I posted and the argument doesn’t hold water. The extension is the fact that iPadOS doesn’t even use all the capabilities of the M1 processor much less the M4. Essentially, Apple has $1500 worth of hardware crippled to $500 worth of functionality.
It could be used for more but it's not straightforward on how to deliver more. Just running macOS instead of iPadOS isn't the answer, that's just creating a netbook-like equivalent. MacOS and Mac apps aren't optimal for a device with 8GB RAM and no memory swapping. A windowed UI doesn't scale well for an 11" display, even less with an on-screen keyboard.
Even if that could be looked past, they'd have to figure out how to install and boot it up, whether it's dual boot with iPadOS or replaces it, meaning it's no longer a mobile device, it's a touch-based laptop.
It's easy to test this today using Sidecar, macOS isn't user-friendly with just touch and a small display.
It could work as a mode inside iPadOS where it's like an app that launches into a Mac environment and runs Mac apps without rebooting into a separate OS. The touch screen would then be used for click input and swiping out of the environment. When connected to a large display, it would be like using a Mac mini.
Or they could keep improving iPadOS but a fundamental difference would be allowing apps to be installed from anywhere. That's a key feature of a Mac, being able to build apps on it, install tools from anywhere and have full access to the filesystem.
Then comes the question of why to make a MacPad. If someone already owned a Mac, what scenario would make them put the Mac away and do the same tasks on a smaller screen device? A MacPad has appeal for people who use it as their only device because it fills in missing functionality from iPadOS but it's not clear why someone who already owns a Mac would buy one. For drawing perhaps but this can be done with Sidecar.
Given that Apple sells so many iPads and they are the best-selling tablet all while touch laptops are available suggests people don't want touch laptops in large numbers. There's an appeal for some but it's very limited appeal to the point that it doesn't make sense for Apple to design the product around it. Adding it as an extra feature would be enough and it could even be done with a virtual machine app like Parallels as long as the performance hit was minimal. Apple could partner with Parallels to make a fast Mac VM environment for iPadOS. Apple can then see the ways that people use the Mac part and improve iPadOS accordingly.