Apple will not 'converge' iPad and MacBook lines, says Tim Cook
It has long been speculated that Apple's iPad and MacBook would one day come together in a hybrid device, but Apple CEO Tim Cook put those rumors to bed on Sunday, saying converged machines come with inherent compromises.
As Apple is intent on delivering the best possible experience for both iPad and Mac users, it does not currently subscribe to a one-device-fits-all strategy, Cook told Independent.ie in a recent interview.
"We feel strongly that customers are not really looking for a converged Mac and iPad," Cook said. "Because what that would wind up doing, or what we're worried would happen, is that neither experience would be as good as the customer wants. So we want to make the best tablet in the world and the best Mac in the world. And putting those two together would not achieve either. You'd begin to compromise in different ways."
Cook last week said the new iPad Pro with its massive 12.9-inch display and dedicated accessories is a viable replacement for notebook or desktop PCs. He guesses some iPad Pro users will ditch their other devices altogether, save for phones.
The idea of an Apple-branded convergence device has been bandied about by analysts and pundits alike for years, even before the company decided on iOS to power iPad. Those rumors pick up a bit more steam every time Apple updates its ARM-based A-series chip, which with the latest A9 series -- specifically the A9X -- stands as legitimate competition to desktop-class CPUs built by Intel.
"It's true that the difference between the X86 and the A-series is much less than it's ever been," says Cook. "That said, what we've tried to do is to recognize that people use both iOS and Mac devices. So we've taken certain features and made them more seamless across the devices. So with things like Handoff we just made it really simple to work on one of our products and pick it up and work on the next product."
While Cook did not explicitly rule out an A-series MacBook, his statements suggest the company has no immediate plans to transplant its chip designs into a more traditional form factor.
As Apple is intent on delivering the best possible experience for both iPad and Mac users, it does not currently subscribe to a one-device-fits-all strategy, Cook told Independent.ie in a recent interview.
"We feel strongly that customers are not really looking for a converged Mac and iPad," Cook said. "Because what that would wind up doing, or what we're worried would happen, is that neither experience would be as good as the customer wants. So we want to make the best tablet in the world and the best Mac in the world. And putting those two together would not achieve either. You'd begin to compromise in different ways."
Cook last week said the new iPad Pro with its massive 12.9-inch display and dedicated accessories is a viable replacement for notebook or desktop PCs. He guesses some iPad Pro users will ditch their other devices altogether, save for phones.
The idea of an Apple-branded convergence device has been bandied about by analysts and pundits alike for years, even before the company decided on iOS to power iPad. Those rumors pick up a bit more steam every time Apple updates its ARM-based A-series chip, which with the latest A9 series -- specifically the A9X -- stands as legitimate competition to desktop-class CPUs built by Intel.
"It's true that the difference between the X86 and the A-series is much less than it's ever been," says Cook. "That said, what we've tried to do is to recognize that people use both iOS and Mac devices. So we've taken certain features and made them more seamless across the devices. So with things like Handoff we just made it really simple to work on one of our products and pick it up and work on the next product."
While Cook did not explicitly rule out an A-series MacBook, his statements suggest the company has no immediate plans to transplant its chip designs into a more traditional form factor.
Comments
Microsoft has been pushing PC-tablet convergence for over 20 years in the form of the "tablet PC" vision, dating back to the Windows 3.11 days. It has a very long history of being a niche, not a mainstream thing.
I do think A-series Macs will likely come eventually, if Intel doesn't pull it together on performance per power consumption. It would be an ugly transition, but Apple has helped us through that same transition twice already.
Well, he did say the same thing a couple of years ago, about "converging" iOS and OSX, didn't he?
Of course, Apple's mobile processors haven't really been capable of it anyway, have they.
...but, eventually, won't "A?" be?
When that happens, it'll be time to take the question seriously. Denials might then no longer be moot.
The A9 and A9X are faster than the Core-M chip used in the new MacBook. Then you have the Mac mini, which starts with a 1.4Ghz Core-i5 and 4GiB RAM. Let's not forget Apple doesn't have to use those same low-clockrates and reduced cores since space for heat dissipation isn't as big an issue as with their handheld devices.
The A9 and A9X are faster than the Core-M chip used in the new MacBook. Then you have the Mac mini, which starts with a 1.4Ghz Core-i5 and 4GiB RAM. Let's not forget Apple doesn't have to use those same low-clockrates and reduced cores since space for heat dissipation isn't as big an issue as with their handheld devices.
Yeah but the question is, will it run Photoshop? /s
"Apple will not 'converge' iPad and MacBook lines, says Tim Cook".
Great. Then, please release a Mac tablet to boost sales. Otherwise, it is a deal breaker for our University.
Most Mac App are not touch friendly... look at Windows 10... outside web browsing or file management, what do you use Touch for? Especially with 3D Touch... The 3D trackpack is the best alternative on the Mac.
While I widely prefer Apple's approach, and think MS's combination of a bad laptop and a bad tablet paired with a Franken-OS that combines 25 years of Windows GUIs (each of them tasteless) with a defunct touch-GUI (equally tasteless) with no quality apps is nonsensical, I have to admit that there are issues Apple has not answered yet.
The "truck" metaphor is mainly right, but not completely. It is not just about specific expert tasks that still belong on a desktop or laptop (and Apple does not argue that, FCP, Logic and Xcode are not on iOS for a reason), what holds everything back (or limits acceptance to people like me, who accept to work around the limitations) includes some very basic things almost everybody needs. Text selection, something as comfortable as drag and drop (instead of clumsy long-press menus), accessing the same data from multiple apps without redundant copies and without using the Cloud, email encryption outside of corporations with proper paid certificates, integrated encryption of files stored in the Cloud, accessing files somebody hands you on a thumb drive, at least an option to use a wired network connection where no alternative is available, storage providers for network storage outside the Cloud (corporate file shares, SAN etc.). All these things are no "truck" duties, still they are not there, or require far too much hassle.
iOS has come a long way, and ARM-based hardware has come a long way, but there are still usability limitations, functionality limitations, and quite some ideas that heavily rely on the fantasy-world of unlimited Internet access and safe Cloud services, neither of which are here now or will be in the near term.
Cook's comments deny nothing of the sort.
What's your interpretation?
You're looking for a Mac notebook.
Another thing Apple is doing by keeping iPad touch-only and releasing a Pro tablet is forcing develops who want pro apps on this platform to custom design them for it. If Adobe ever does a touch-first full version of PS it'll be because of Apple and no one else. You'd think a company that will produce less than $5B gross profit this year Apple could persuade them to work on this version, but I guess we will see. The Pro iPad platform is a bit of a chicken and egg situation at this point. If they do and others follow suit Apple's way to doing things will bring about a revolution for professionals, if not Micrsosoft's lack of taste and vision will be mistaken or at least talked about in some media in an unjustified and I'd say in accurate manner.
While I agree with Tim Cook about the foolishness of an OS X & iOS "hybrid" device, I disagree with him about the supposed "lack of compromises" in what we have right now. Like I said in another thread today, even the iPad PRO is not yet PRO due to the inherent limitations of iOS, the lack of PRO apps (wherefore art thou FCPX on iOS?), and the fact that even though it's a honking 12-inches in size the iPad PRO is still considered a Mobile Device (i.e., like a PHONE), and as such Google kicks down the resolution of YouTube videos on it to 720p (as stupid Google does on all iOS "mobile" devices).
Give us a more feature rich iOS. It's slowly getting there, but it is SLOW.
Give us PRO apps for iOS especially catered to the iPad PRO and it's big screen.
Give us a tablet that gets around stupid YouTube "720p max" resolution limit and plays 1080p and even 4K.
Give us the ability to multi-task more than just 2 apps.
If the iPad PRO is really PRO, it should shoot 4K with its camera, not just be able edit 4K you already have somewhere else.
Give us the ability to use any Apple Tablet as a viewfinder for pro and prosumer cameras.
And stop telling people like me, "You need a MacBook Pro" or some other such foolishness. Because you full well know that Tim Cook himself is pitching the iPad PRO as a notebook replacement, even if that pitch cannibalizes MacBook sales. He's pitching it as "look at all the things you can do with it," but frankly, it's hardly that much more than what any other iOS device can do right now. The above "Give us" list stands firm.
Nice to hear this nonsense stamped on.
I would also like Macs to stay intel, it gives you bootcamp for those Windows only games and applications.
OS X isn't getting Touch. That's the only message you can derive from this.
Without Touch on OS X, you can't have a hybrid OS or a 2 in 1.
There isn't anything to prevent iOS from absorbing much more OS X functionality, and I expect that an iOS in the distant future might look like a sleek OS X with touch.
There isn't any reason Apple is going to use its x86 platform for touch; the sooner x86 becomes irrelevant, the better. Why keep it on life support by adding touch?
Great. I get it. iOS and OS X will not converge. However, if the A9X is faster than a MacBook, than a version of the A10 or A11 absolutely will result in a Mac running it with OS X and apps optimized for it (iWork). Apple will not continue to pay for Intel chips if its own are faster. It's a profit margin thing.
While the build quality is typically Apple high level, something about its size and how thin it is makes it feel more so.
For under $1000 (non-lte) I can see this replacing a laptop for many people I know. It really comes down to asking yourself.. what do I create? If you create emails, photographs or videos with iPhone, and pages, numbers or keynote documents - and let's be honest - this will be MOST people - now that iCloud works so well an iPad Pro and an iPhone can be all you need. If you make apps, books, movies, music, science, etc., you probably still want a Mac instead of or in addition to an iPad. Not definitely, depending on what you do exactly in those categories, but probably.