Rayz2016 said: If they create a bastardised hybrid FrankenPad then developers will create apps that are essentially Mac apps, and the ergonomics well go out the window.
That is a really good point to keep in mind whenever 'providing the option', as it impacts development and the eco-system. Unfortunately most developers aren't also UI experts or even sometimes savvy, so the more the OS and guidelines can push conformance, the better the end product and experience. That's part (I might even argue nearly all) of what made the Mac great in the first place, and a huge component of Apple's success.
That said, the whole idea of phone/tablet type devices eventually replacing desktops/laptops can't happen without that kind of move. Touch screens are great for some mobile applications, but they simply aren't as efficient when in a laptop/desktop type configuration (for most people). I don't think this is something technological advancement is going to change either... as I can't even imagine a solution that isn't sci-fi fantasy.
As far as I remember, Apple has churned out a fairly sizeable MacOs update almost every year since Jobs returned. So i have no idea where this “dead platform” crap is coming from.
Yes, but there wasn't much substance to them, and in many cases they 'updated' apps to make them worse. The UI has been falling apart. Underlying technologies weren't being maintained, etc. Then add years of no pro machine updates, and lack of keeping anything but the iMac and laptops up to date (and then ruining some of them in the opinion of some). Then, add statements and direction that appeared Apple was pushing a shift from Mac to iOS devices. Seems a reasonable speculation to me.
Yes, there are some recent signs of hope, like iMac Pro and announced Mac Pro update. Changing the underlying file system and such are big last year too. And, the new UI kit to make it easier to bring iOS apps to the Mac is at least something (whether net positive or not remains to be seen). The lack of hardware is still quite troubling, though.
Soli said: Wait until you read his comments that the keynote was for those under 5yo and that Apple is only "accidentally" profiting from Mac sales.
You really have trouble with reading comprehension, or you're just being obtuse for the sake of argument. That comment was in regards to Mimoji and Lego AR stuff, not the entire keynote. The accident profit comment is in context of Mac people and developers still needing new machines, despite Apple's failures to keep the line updated. Who the heck buys a 2013 Mac Pro (like I'm going to have to) or 2012 Mac Mini, or an expensive laptop with a broken keyboards (like my son is about to do) unless they are somehow tied pretty tightly to the platform (despite those shortcomings)?
canukstorm said: "Dead" as in dead for pro users who want to get shit done and fear of macOS being more like iOS, in other words dumbed down.
Yes, and then there is that. But, at least as long as the OS is stable, companies have the ability to make pro apps... Oh, wait... maybe they'll find ways to kill those too (cf. OpenGL news).
canukstorm said: "Dead" as in dead for pro users who want to get shit done and fear of macOS being more like iOS, in other words dumbed down.
Yes, and then there is that. But, at least as long as the OS is stable, companies have the ability to make pro apps... Oh, wait... maybe they'll find ways to kill those too (cf. OpenGL news).
If I had to guess, it will be the UI equivalent of a Mobile website, which offers the advanced option of going to the standard desktop website interface. If iOS apps are ported to the Mac with the respective interface, but support more advanced features through a full blown interface, we may get the best of both worlds. Once Apple has enough of the iOS "touch" apps available on the Mac, then why not offer a touch display? Until then, they'll have an inconsistent interface which will only serve to confuse some customers, with inconsistent touch screen behavior. When all the basic apps are available with a touch interface, then it's up to the user whether to incorporate those features into their interaction with the Mac, or if they opt for the more advanced "full-featured" version, which may not be fully "touchified" for the Mac (nor appropriate to do so), then they will have made the choice, and deal with the consequences. Likewise, if Apple offers a full array of non-touch apps which are otherwise identical to their iOS apps, it will also be confusing for the customer who expects to be able to touch the screen. So it seems like an inevitable outcome that the Mac display will one day be touch capable.
mac_128 said: If I had to guess, it will be the UI equivalent of a Mobile website, which offers the advanced option of going to the standard desktop website interface. If iOS apps are ported to the Mac with the respective interface, but support more advanced features through a full blown interface, we may get the best of both worlds. Once Apple has enough of the iOS "touch" apps available on the Mac, then why not offer a touch display? Until then, they'll have an inconsistent interface which will only serve to confuse some customers, with inconsistent touch screen behavior. When all the basic apps are available with a touch interface, then it's up to the user whether to incorporate those features into their interaction with the Mac, or if they opt for the more advanced "full-featured" version, which may not be fully "touchified" for the Mac (nor appropriate to do so), then they will have made the choice, and deal with the consequences. Likewise, if Apple offers a full array of non-touch apps which are otherwise identical to their iOS apps, it will also be confusing for the customer who expects to be able to touch the screen. So it seems like an inevitable outcome that the Mac display will one day be touch capable.
Although... if the analogy holds, no one does mobile version websites any longer, they have gone responsive design. But, I think what you've outlined is one possibility, the other might be as Andy Ihnatko said on the most recent MacBreak Weekly...
paraphrase: Craig didn't answer the question everyone is asking (re: Mac's future), he answered the question of whether iOS and macOS will be merged. ... It feels more like Apple is trying to get Mac users more comfortable with iOS so they feel like they are just stepping off one boat into another, and don't have as far to swim.
If I had to guess, I'd vote for the latter longer-term. I'm sure Apple will make Macs for a bit, but I don't think the Mac has a long-term future. Most evidence seems to point in that direction, including what Apple says (but more importantly, what they don't, or what they evade answering).
danvm said: Isn't the same ergonomics issues you have with an iPad Pro + Smart Keyboard? Why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
Isn't the Smart Keyboard just an accessory? If so, it seems like you already answered your own question.
Yes, it is a compromise situation. You use your iPad as a tablet, but then get more efficient text input via the physical keyboard. But, overall, it's far less efficient as using a laptop. But... Apple has been trying to advertise this setup as a 'computer' replacement, hence the discrepancy.
Obviously the setup serves as an adequate computer replacement for some. But getting back to the question of "why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad..." In my opinion, all Apple is saying is that it's "good" for people to have the option of a physical keyboard. That's a far cry from saying it's a good idea to produce an iPad with a physical keyboard that sits on a different plane than the screen.
I think you hit the nail on my point. Apple said that's good for people to have to option of a physical keyboard, but it works as bad as Federighi describes. There is the reason of my question, why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
Federighi said: "We really feel that the ergonomics of using a Mac are that your hands are rested on a surface, and that lifting your arm up to poke a screen is a pretty fatiguing thing to do," he said.
Isn't the same ergonomics issues you have with an iPad Pro + Smart Keyboard? Why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
No, because I don’t have a Smart Keyboard.
If they create a bastardised hybrid FrankenPad then developers will create apps that are essentially Mac apps, and the ergonomics well go out the window.
Maybe you don't have the Smart Keyboard, but others do. Even Apple start to push the iPad Pro + Smart Keyboard as desktop replacements, even though the ergonomic issues that Federighi mention, that are in line with what Jobs said many years ago. So, why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
dabe said: Obviously the setup serves as an adequate computer replacement for some. But getting back to the question of "why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad..." In my opinion, all Apple is saying is that it's "good" for people to have the option of a physical keyboard. That's a far cry from saying it's a good idea to produce an iPad with a physical keyboard that sits on a different plane than the screen.
I think you hit the nail on my point. Apple said that's good for people to have to option of a physical keyboard, but it works as bad as Federighi describes. There is the reason of my question, why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
I think there is a fundamental difference between adding keyboard to an iPad and adding a touch-screen to a Mac. The iPad is normally meant to be used as a tablet, but adding a keyboard at least makes it somewhat usable for efficient text entry (there is still a text-selection issue). But, adding a touch-screen to a Mac, encourage a user to leave the keyboard/trackpad/mouse to do less-efficient input via the screen.
As others have said though, maybe less efficient isn't worse in every case, and it opens up accessibility. What I'd like to see is trackpad/mouse input for the iPad... maybe it wouldn't have to be full mouse support, but it would make text-selection and such much more usable (assuming the iPad really is meant to be a laptop replacement).
danvm said: Maybe you don't have the Smart Keyboard, but others do. Even Apple start to push the iPad Pro + Smart Keyboard as desktop replacements, even though the ergonomic issues that Federighi mention, that are in line with what Jobs said many years ago. So, why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
Oh, maybe I see what you're saying now. Why is it bad ergonomics to touch a laptop screen, but not touch an iPad screen (when using with a keyboard)? Good point... they aren't any different. It's bad ergonomics either way, and with an iPad, you don't even have the option of mouse/trackpad input. The only argument is that it's optional, so you don't have to use an iPad like that... but yes, Apple is pushing it.
mac_128 said: If I had to guess, it will be the UI equivalent of a Mobile website, which offers the advanced option of going to the standard desktop website interface. If iOS apps are ported to the Mac with the respective interface, but support more advanced features through a full blown interface, we may get the best of both worlds. Once Apple has enough of the iOS "touch" apps available on the Mac, then why not offer a touch display? Until then, they'll have an inconsistent interface which will only serve to confuse some customers, with inconsistent touch screen behavior. When all the basic apps are available with a touch interface, then it's up to the user whether to incorporate those features into their interaction with the Mac, or if they opt for the more advanced "full-featured" version, which may not be fully "touchified" for the Mac (nor appropriate to do so), then they will have made the choice, and deal with the consequences. Likewise, if Apple offers a full array of non-touch apps which are otherwise identical to their iOS apps, it will also be confusing for the customer who expects to be able to touch the screen. So it seems like an inevitable outcome that the Mac display will one day be touch capable.
Although... if the analogy holds, no one does mobile version websites any longer, they have gone responsive design. But, I think what you've outlined is one possibility, the other might be as Andy Ihnatko said on the most recent MacBreak Weekly...
paraphrase: Craig didn't answer the question everyone is asking (re: Mac's future), he answered the question of whether iOS and macOS will be merged. ... It feels more like Apple is trying to get Mac users more comfortable with iOS so they feel like they are just stepping off one boat into another, and don't have as far to swim.
If I had to guess, I'd vote for the latter longer-term. I'm sure Apple will make Macs for a bit, but I don't think the Mac has a long-term future. Most evidence seems to point in that direction, including what Apple says (but more importantly, what they don't, or what they evade answering).
I don't think it's about making Mac users more comfortable with iOS. I think it's the other way around => building a platform so that developers that are iOS-only have an easier time of bringing their apps to the Mac. This is more about bolstering the Mac ecosystem vs the other way around. I actually do think the Mac has a bright future but more so as a niche platform catered to high-end users: software developers, creative professionals, office productivity, etc.., whereas iOS / iPad Pro will cater more to mainstream users.
canukstorm said: I don't think it's about making Mac users more comfortable with iOS. I think it's the other way around => building a platform so that developers that are iOS-only have an easier time of bringing their apps to the Mac. This is more about bolstering the Mac ecosystem vs the other way around. I actually do think the Mac has a bright future but more so as a niche platform catered to high-end users: software developers, creative professionals, office productivity, etc.., whereas iOS / iPad Pro will cater more to mainstream users.
Does the Mac need bolstering, though? It seems like it was/is doing just fine until Apple got behind on hardware and they started to (sloppily, IMO) start integrating iCloud, and re-doing apps. While some of the iOS data integration is good and welcomed, I don't really want macOS to become more like iOS.
And, if the Mac starts catering increasingly to only the high-end, Apple will need to start making the non-high-end users more comfortable working solely with iOS.
canukstorm said: I don't think it's about making Mac users more comfortable with iOS. I think it's the other way around => building a platform so that developers that are iOS-only have an easier time of bringing their apps to the Mac. This is more about bolstering the Mac ecosystem vs the other way around. I actually do think the Mac has a bright future but more so as a niche platform catered to high-end users: software developers, creative professionals, office productivity, etc.., whereas iOS / iPad Pro will cater more to mainstream users.
Does the Mac need bolstering, though? It seems like it was/is doing just fine until Apple got behind on hardware and they started to (sloppily, IMO) start integrating iCloud, and re-doing apps. While some of the iOS data integration is good and welcomed, I don't really want macOS to become more like iOS.
And, if the Mac starts catering increasingly to only the high-end, Apple will need to start making the non-high-end users more comfortable working solely with iOS.
"And, if the Mac starts catering increasingly to only the high-end, Apple will need to start making the non-high-end users more comfortable working solely with iOS."
I agree with this. According to a report Mark Gurman had out earlier when he predicted the Marzipan project & iOS being focused on refinement, we will see an iPad-focused iOS next year along with a redesign of the Home Screen.
danvm said: Maybe you don't have the Smart Keyboard, but others do. Even Apple start to push the iPad Pro + Smart Keyboard as desktop replacements, even though the ergonomic issues that Federighi mention, that are in line with what Jobs said many years ago. So, why it's bad in the Mac and good in the iPad?
Oh, maybe I see what you're saying now. Why is it bad ergonomics to touch a laptop screen, but not touch an iPad screen (when using with a keyboard)? Good point... they aren't any different. It's bad ergonomics either way, and with an iPad, you don't even have the option of mouse/trackpad input. The only argument is that it's optional, so you don't have to use an iPad like that... but yes, Apple is pushing it.
And that’s not really much of an argument considering that if a MacBook had a touchscreen, it would also be optional. Customers could continue to use the Mac as they always have ignoring the touch screen feature. And just like the keyboard (and pencil) is an optional, additional purchase accessory for the iPad; so too would a touch screen be an additional option purchase for a Mac. I really don’t see the difference.
Apple is pushing the iPad Pro as a computer replacement, not merely offering up an optional keyboard, but marketing commercials with customers using them, and asking “what’s a computer?” Now Apple is saying that same configuration is ergonomically fatiguing to use on the Mac. So why not simply give the customers the option? When they configure their MacBook on the Apple Store, they can choose a standard display or a touchscreen, and then use it, or not, as they see fit.
canukstorm said: "And, if the Mac starts catering increasingly to only the high-end, Apple will need to start making the non-high-end users more comfortable working solely with iOS."
I agree with this. According to a report Mark Gurman had out earlier when he predicted the Marzipan project & iOS being focused on refinement, we will see an iPad-focused iOS next year along with a redesign of the Home Screen.
Yes, and the reason this is a bit scary to someone like me, is that I'm not generally a high-end Mac user anymore. It is hard for me to justify spending $5k+ on a new computer... yet I can't get my work done on iOS. So, I'm stuck in this place where I feel Apple is pushing me away, but I don't have a great place to go. I either have to come up with lots of cash, move to an inferior workflow, or move to another inferior platform.
If I felt they even had a good reason for it, OK. But, I think it is more a problem with lack of vision and pie-chart-ism.
mac_128 said: And that’s not really much of an argument considering that if a MacBook had a touchscreen, it would also be optional. Customers could continue to use the Mac as they always have ignoring the touch screen feature. And just like the keyboard (and pencil) is an optional, additional purchase accessory for the iPad; so too would a touch screen be an additional option purchase for a Mac. I really don’t see the difference.
Apple is pushing the iPad Pro as a computer replacement, not merely offering up an optional keyboard, but marketing commercials with customers using them, and asking “what’s a computer?” Now Apple is saying that same configuration is ergonomically fatiguing to use on the Mac. So why not simply give the customers the option? When they configure their MacBook on the Apple Store, they can choose a standard display or a touchscreen, and then use it, or not, as they see fit.
Yes, I completely agree with you here. Especially if it were a BTO option for the laptop. My only real concern is cost. Maybe a slight concern about where the UI goes with it, but if optional, a developer couldn't depend on it being there, so they shouldn't go too wild.
Comments
ROFL!
🤣
That said, the whole idea of phone/tablet type devices eventually replacing desktops/laptops can't happen without that kind of move. Touch screens are great for some mobile applications, but they simply aren't as efficient when in a laptop/desktop type configuration (for most people). I don't think this is something technological advancement is going to change either... as I can't even imagine a solution that isn't sci-fi fantasy.
Yes, but there wasn't much substance to them, and in many cases they 'updated' apps to make them worse. The UI has been falling apart. Underlying technologies weren't being maintained, etc. Then add years of no pro machine updates, and lack of keeping anything but the iMac and laptops up to date (and then ruining some of them in the opinion of some). Then, add statements and direction that appeared Apple was pushing a shift from Mac to iOS devices. Seems a reasonable speculation to me.
Yes, there are some recent signs of hope, like iMac Pro and announced Mac Pro update. Changing the underlying file system and such are big last year too. And, the new UI kit to make it easier to bring iOS apps to the Mac is at least something (whether net positive or not remains to be seen). The lack of hardware is still quite troubling, though.
You really have trouble with reading comprehension, or you're just being obtuse for the sake of argument. That comment was in regards to Mimoji and Lego AR stuff, not the entire keynote. The accident profit comment is in context of Mac people and developers still needing new machines, despite Apple's failures to keep the line updated. Who the heck buys a 2013 Mac Pro (like I'm going to have to) or 2012 Mac Mini, or an expensive laptop with a broken keyboards (like my son is about to do) unless they are somehow tied pretty tightly to the platform (despite those shortcomings)?
But, at least as long as the OS is stable, companies have the ability to make pro apps...
Oh, wait... maybe they'll find ways to kill those too (cf. OpenGL news).
But, I think what you've outlined is one possibility, the other might be as Andy Ihnatko said on the most recent MacBreak Weekly...
paraphrase: Craig didn't answer the question everyone is asking (re: Mac's future), he answered the question of whether iOS and macOS will be merged. ... It feels more like Apple is trying to get Mac users more comfortable with iOS so they feel like they are just stepping off one boat into another, and don't have as far to swim.
If I had to guess, I'd vote for the latter longer-term. I'm sure Apple will make Macs for a bit, but I don't think the Mac has a long-term future. Most evidence seems to point in that direction, including what Apple says (but more importantly, what they don't, or what they evade answering).
The iPad is normally meant to be used as a tablet, but adding a keyboard at least makes it somewhat usable for efficient text entry (there is still a text-selection issue).
But, adding a touch-screen to a Mac, encourage a user to leave the keyboard/trackpad/mouse to do less-efficient input via the screen.
As others have said though, maybe less efficient isn't worse in every case, and it opens up accessibility. What I'd like to see is trackpad/mouse input for the iPad... maybe it wouldn't have to be full mouse support, but it would make text-selection and such much more usable (assuming the iPad really is meant to be a laptop replacement).
Good point... they aren't any different. It's bad ergonomics either way, and with an iPad, you don't even have the option of mouse/trackpad input.
The only argument is that it's optional, so you don't have to use an iPad like that... but yes, Apple is pushing it.
And, if the Mac starts catering increasingly to only the high-end, Apple will need to start making the non-high-end users more comfortable working solely with iOS.
I agree with this. According to a report Mark Gurman had out earlier when he predicted the Marzipan project & iOS being focused on refinement, we will see an iPad-focused iOS next year along with a redesign of the Home Screen.
Apple is pushing the iPad Pro as a computer replacement, not merely offering up an optional keyboard, but marketing commercials with customers using them, and asking “what’s a computer?” Now Apple is saying that same configuration is ergonomically fatiguing to use on the Mac. So why not simply give the customers the option? When they configure their MacBook on the Apple Store, they can choose a standard display or a touchscreen, and then use it, or not, as they see fit.
If I felt they even had a good reason for it, OK. But, I think it is more a problem with lack of vision and pie-chart-ism.