1. USB-C isn’t what enables mouse support. First, most mice (“mouses”) are USB-A or Bluetooth. And Apple no longer sells a wired mouse of any kind, so if they really wanted to support an iPad mouse, they’d go Bluetooth.
2. The only time I want a mouse on my iPad is when I run software like Citrix Receiver to connect to corporate computers (usually Windows). Citrix already sells a mouse for iOS users of their app: https://youtu.be/9R6WcZkz-Ik (and it works well)
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
...while I’m aware Apple has changed its mind on things before, they’ve spoken to this topic specifically and so many times that I have no reason to doubt them.
That's because they are not merging the two operating systems. They are building a new desktop iOS variant that will one day take macOS's place. That's how I see it. So they aren't exactly lying. Apple has always been good at wordplay.
Marzipan ipad apps running on Mac still have a more general UI and I don’t see them replacing the window metaphor on macOS.
Yet. Marzipan is brand new. It's impossible to say what Marzipan apps will look like, much less be capable of, in a few years. Plus iOS supports multiple windows, just not the overlapping, drag them around the screen metaphor used on the desktop today.
I think the upcoming Mac Pro is the last big hurrah for today's macOS and Intel-based Macs. I think macOS XI is going to be when we see ARM "Macs" running iOS with a macOS-style desktop interface. I'm thinking five years, give or take. That's enough time to fully bake Marzipan and get the majority of developers on board. Once iOS and macOS apps all use UIKit, the guts of the operating system become far less important.
1. USB-C isn’t what enables mouse support. First, most mice (“mouses”) are USB-A or Bluetooth. And Apple no longer sells a wired mouse of any kind, so if they really wanted to support an iPad mouse, they’d go Bluetooth.
2. The only time I want a mouse on my iPad is when I run software like Citrix Receiver to connect to corporate computers (usually Windows). Citrix already sells a mouse for iOS users of their app: https://youtu.be/9R6WcZkz-Ik (and it works well)
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
1. Completely agree.
2. If mouse support comes to the iPad, I think it will be app-specific. There are certain types of applications that almost require a mouse. I can't imagine using a CAD application with my finger or the Pencil.
3. Completely agree. I don't see Apple adding a pointer to the broad iOS interface, at least not on the iPad. If and when a desktop iOS variant emerges, I think it will have pointer support and function much like today's macOS. When it comes to the iPad, however, adding a pointer now makes no sense. The entire iPad experience is built on touch, on a direct connection between you and the hardware. You do not manipulate a virtual finger (pointer) on the screen using another device. You touch directly. Even if you're using the Pencil, you still touch the screen. The whole iPhone/iPad experience is built around touch. Touch will always be the primary/preferred method of interacting with the iPhone and iPad in my opinion, but adding mouse support for specific use cases makes a lot of sense.
I am also of the opinion that the window metaphor is effectively a failed experiment — I would bet that easily 90% of users use nearly all apps full-screen, even many professionals I know. But there are also credible rumors that floating windows are coming to iPad, so etc.
Wait what? Failed? It’s been the standard for like 35 years. Maybe times are changing and the UI will go elsewhere, but you can hardly call that failed. It’s like saying Horses are a failed experiment because we now use cars. Or saying propeller aircraft were a failed experiment because we now use jets. Time moves on and technology evolves but something that was the standard, that made Microsoft what it is today cannot be called a failed experiment.
Oh and I want to add, Windows 8 came out while I was still doing desktop support. The single most hated feature was the automatic full screen apps. People want to have more than one open at a time. Run the remote desktop, next to their email client, next to the IM client, next to the document they are working on. Drag this text from one app and drop it in another. Why else have a 27+ inch screen, or nowadays two or three? Now the engineers I work with often do use their design apps full screen. They have a second screen for the other things. They also work in the one app to the exclusion of everything, and everyone, else. But for a lot of people the purpose of a big monitor is to have multiple windows open.
It sounds crazy, but I think this is 100% true, and I think Marzipan is the beginning of the end for the Mac.
A reminder...
(are you merging mac and ios? no!)
...while I’m aware Apple has changed its mind on things before, they’ve spoken to this topic specifically and so many times that I have no reason to doubt them. Marzipan ipad apps running on Mac still have a more general UI and I don’t see them replacing the window metaphor on macOS.
That's exactly my point, though. What I just described isn't merging OS's at all.
(I also agree that we will probably never see ARM Macs due to this long-term strategy)
I am also of the opinion that the window metaphor is effectively a failed experiment — I would bet that easily 90% of users use nearly all apps full-screen, even many professionals I know. But there are also credible rumors that floating windows are coming to iPad, so etc.
Well, i am assuming you man the two apps side by side on iPad Pro? It is cludgy and you have to learn to do it. I use it all the time, but it isn’t something you would just discover. I think wholistic tabs in apps would be great too, along with an hierarchical file system finder. That would make ipad a complete superceder of laptops. By being better than a laptop at everything.
1. USB-C isn’t what enables mouse support. First, most mice (“mouses”) are USB-A or Bluetooth. And Apple no longer sells a wired mouse of any kind, so if they really wanted to support an iPad mouse, they’d go Bluetooth.
2. The only time I want a mouse on my iPad is when I run software like Citrix Receiver to connect to corporate computers (usually Windows). Citrix already sells a mouse for iOS users of their app: https://youtu.be/9R6WcZkz-Ik (and it works well)
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
I did not know about that that mouse. Great! I hate using Citrix with a touch interface. And that is the point. It isn’t about apps built for iOS generally, it is for certain apps where a touch interface is not the best way of interacting ing. The Apple Pencil deals with this a lot, but for spreadsheets for example, a mouse makes more sense.
It sounds crazy, but I think this is 100% true, and I think Marzipan is the beginning of the end for the Mac.
A reminder...
...while I’m aware Apple has changed its mind on things before, they’ve spoken to this topic specifically and so many times that I have no reason to doubt them. Marzipan ipad apps running on Mac still have a more general UI and I don’t see them replacing the window metaphor on macOS.
macOS does not have to merge with iOS for the Mac to end. Those are two entirely different things.
@robbyx had a great post about it another thread. This is what he wrote:
"I completely disagree. Marzipan lays the foundation for building apps that run on both macOS and iOS. This is the first step to getting rid of macOS as we know it. I don't think Apple is going to bother porting macOS to ARM and maintaining two different hardware platforms for the rather small number of Macs they sell every year. Apple will need the big developers like Adobe, etc. to support the new hardware platform. If the past is any indication, companies like Adobe will take their sweet time porting their apps (which won't be as simple as a recompile) - if they port them at all.
It would be a complete shock if Apple ditched Intel chips across the entire Mac product line. The fact that the rather small Mac market supports multiple virtualization solutions tells me that a lot of Mac customers run Windows apps. A lot of people would abandon the Mac if it didn't have an Intel chip. There's really no compelling argument for Apple to transition the Mac to ARM today. It's not like Apple is bringing lots of new people into the Mac fold. Mac sales have been more or less flat for ages, regardless of what is happening with Intel's chip pipeline. An ARM-based Mac isn't going to attract new customers, but it will push many existing "pro" customers to Windows.
Apple hasn't been excited about the Mac in years - and it shows. I'm sure we'll get a beautiful, fancy, and incredibly overpriced Mac Pro this year to keep the "pro" market happy for another few years. In the meantime, Apple will continue to push the iPad as a laptop replacement, as well as a general purpose computing device. They sure aren't pushing the Mac! What we're going to see with Marzipan is not unlike what we saw with Classic > Carbon > Cocoa. Classic and Carbon are now gone. One day AppKit will be gone too. What makes a lot more sense is for Apple to bring iOS to the desktop when they transition to ARM rather than porting macOS to ARM. I think Marzipan is the first step to making that happen."
Your text claims they won’t bother porting macOS to ARM because it’s too much work, a claim I doubt. iOS is based on macOS, so if iOS works on ARM so will macOS. As for user base, in Q4 Macs generated twice the revenue of iPads:
I also dont believe Apple isn’t excited about Mac. Schiller was recently on ATP and said the opposite. They love their Macs as much as we do. iOS and macOS are different tools for different use cases. If you don’t like today’s Macs I don’t know what’s wrong with ya. Are you really claiming that you need a MP only?
It sounds crazy, but I think this is 100% true, and I think Marzipan is the beginning of the end for the Mac.
A reminder...
(are you merging mac and ios? no!)
...while I’m aware Apple has changed its mind on things before, they’ve spoken to this topic specifically and so many times that I have no reason to doubt them. Marzipan ipad apps running on Mac still have a more general UI and I don’t see them replacing the window metaphor on macOS.
That's exactly my point, though. What I just described isn't merging OS's at all.
(I also agree that we will probably never see ARM Macs due to this long-term strategy)
I am also of the opinion that the window metaphor is effectively a failed experiment — I would bet that easily 90% of users use nearly all apps full-screen, even many professionals I know. But there are also credible rumors that floating windows are coming to iPad, so etc.
You believe most people use all fullscreen apps? On a 27” monitor!? Nuh-uh.
If you arent suggesting a merged OS via iOS apps running on Mac, then I’m at a loss to what you’re suggesting, other than they drop the macOS platform entirely, which isn’t happening anytime remotely soon. Perhaps someday, but there’s no reason to believe it’s anything to worry about for a long time. 20 years from now? Maybe.
Apple hasn't been excited about the Mac in years - and it shows. I'm sure we'll get a beautiful, fancy, and incredibly overpriced Mac Pro this year to keep the "pro" market happy for another few years. In the meantime, Apple will continue to push the iPad as a laptop replacement, as well as a general purpose computing device. They sure aren't pushing the Mac! What we're going to see with Marzipan is not unlike what we saw with Classic > Carbon > Cocoa.
I don’t know why people take statements like this seriously. They’ve been filling all the gaps in the Mac lineup, and aside from a stumble where we had multiple pauses in updates overlapping, have more than proven to me that they actively care about the Mac. I haven’t seen them “pushing” the Mac any less than any other time in the past decade.
Also sounds like they don’t really understand what Marzipan is. They’re literally just bridging gaps between iOS and macOS to make it easier to target both platforms when building apps. The idea that making it easier for iOS developers to start targeting the Mac as well somehow signals the death of the Mac is absurd for obvious reasons.
Apple hasn't been excited about the Mac in years - and it shows. I'm sure we'll get a beautiful, fancy, and incredibly overpriced Mac Pro this year to keep the "pro" market happy for another few years. In the meantime, Apple will continue to push the iPad as a laptop replacement, as well as a general purpose computing device. They sure aren't pushing the Mac! What we're going to see with Marzipan is not unlike what we saw with Classic > Carbon > Cocoa.
I don’t know why people take statements like this seriously. They’ve been filling all the gaps in the Mac lineup, and aside from a stumble where we had multiple pauses in updates overlapping, have more than proven to me that they actively care about the Mac. I haven’t seen them “pushing” the Mac any less than any other time in the past decade.
Also sounds like they don’t really understand what Marzipan is. They’re literally just bridging gaps between iOS and macOS to make it easier to target both platforms when building apps. The idea that making it easier for iOS developers to start targeting the Mac as well somehow signals the death of the Mac is absurd for obvious reasons.
It's not absurd at all. I would suggest that you're simply not looking far enough into the future. Making it easier for iOS developers to target the Mac standardizes development between the two platforms. The initial and short-term result will be iOS apps coming to the Mac. The long-term result will be Mac and iOS apps using all of the same APIs. Once that happens, the underlying guts of the OS become less important. And while iOS is based on macOS, they are still quite different in many key respects, not the least of which is user access to the Unix layer of macOS.
I think it's very obvious from the way Apple has treated the Mac over the past decade that its heart now belongs to iOS. The Mac Pro has been a joke product for years now. The trashcan Mac Pro wasn't a proper "pro" device, unless you like a rat's nest of wires and stacks of external boxes. Mac prices keep rising, yet the hardware is never cutting-edge. Sometimes it's several years out of date, yet still commands top dollar. Furthermore, Apple is doing more and more to lock the Mac down (T2 chip) as well as limit it's overall usefulness as a Unix platform. They have gutted Server. Each macOS revision sees macOS lose a bit more of its Unix-ness, even if it's not always obvious to the end user.
As for Apple not pushing the Mac, they don't. They've accepted their marketshare glass ceiling and aren't doing anything to break through. They haven't for years. In fact, they do the opposite. They raise prices and further alienate many types of users. The new Mini is a perfect example. In my opinion they are really starting to push more of their user base to iOS and the iPad as a general purpose computing tool. They're happy to milk the Mac, just as they milked the Apple II back in the day, but the focus is now on iOS, just as it was on the Mac back in the twilight days of the Apple II. I find it hard to believe that they will dedicate the resources to porting macOS (as we know it today) to ARM. They could and probably already have, but I don't think they'll bring it to market until most apps use Marzipan.
In the end, whether we call it macOS or iOS probably doesn't matter. Long-term they will be one unified OS. Marzipan starts that process. When iOS moves to the desktop, I don't think most users will notice and I think that's very much Apple's goal. What I see being lost, ultimately, from macOS is all of the Unix stuff. Just like one doesn't have access to this part of iOS, I believe macOS will ultimately follow.
Apple hasn't been excited about the Mac in years - and it shows. I'm sure we'll get a beautiful, fancy, and incredibly overpriced Mac Pro this year to keep the "pro" market happy for another few years. In the meantime, Apple will continue to push the iPad as a laptop replacement, as well as a general purpose computing device. They sure aren't pushing the Mac! What we're going to see with Marzipan is not unlike what we saw with Classic > Carbon > Cocoa.
I don’t know why people take statements like this seriously. They’ve been filling all the gaps in the Mac lineup, and aside from a stumble where we had multiple pauses in updates overlapping, have more than proven to me that they actively care about the Mac. I haven’t seen them “pushing” the Mac any less than any other time in the past decade.
Also sounds like they don’t really understand what Marzipan is. They’re literally just bridging gaps between iOS and macOS to make it easier to target both platforms when building apps. The idea that making it easier for iOS developers to start targeting the Mac as well somehow signals the death of the Mac is absurd for obvious reasons.
It's not absurd at all. I would suggest that you're simply not looking far enough into the future. Making it easier for iOS developers to target the Mac standardizes development between the two platforms. The initial and short-term result will be iOS apps coming to the Mac. The long-term result will be Mac and iOS apps using all of the same APIs. Once that happens, the underlying guts of the OS become less important. And while iOS is based on macOS, they are still quite different in many key respects, not the least of which is user access to the Unix layer of macOS.
I think it's very obvious from the way Apple has treated the Mac over the past decade that its heart now belongs to iOS. The Mac Pro has been a joke product for years now. The trashcan Mac Pro wasn't a proper "pro" device, unless you like a rat's nest of wires and stacks of external boxes. Mac prices keep rising, yet the hardware is never cutting-edge. Sometimes it's several years out of date, yet still commands top dollar. Furthermore, Apple is doing more and more to lock the Mac down (T2 chip) as well as limit it's overall usefulness as a Unix platform. They have gutted Server. Each macOS revision sees macOS lose a bit more of its Unix-ness, even if it's not always obvious to the end user.
As for Apple not pushing the Mac, they don't. They've accepted their marketshare glass ceiling and aren't doing anything to break through. They haven't for years. In fact, they do the opposite. They raise prices and further alienate many types of users. The new Mini is a perfect example. In my opinion they are really starting to push more of their user base to iOS and the iPad as a general purpose computing tool. They're happy to milk the Mac, just as they milked the Apple II back in the day, but the focus is now on iOS, just as it was on the Mac back in the twilight days of the Apple II. I find it hard to believe that they will dedicate the resources to porting macOS (as we know it today) to ARM. They could and probably already have, but I don't think they'll bring it to market until most apps use Marzipan.
In the end, whether we call it macOS or iOS probably doesn't matter. Long-term they will be one unified OS. Marzipan starts that process. When iOS moves to the desktop, I don't think most users will notice and I think that's very much Apple's goal. What I see being lost, ultimately, from macOS is all of the Unix stuff. Just like one doesn't have access to this part of iOS, I believe macOS will ultimately follow.
I can't disagree. The comparison to when they were selling the Mac and AppleII series is very apt. They did sell the AppleII up until the early '90s but you could tell the Mac was where they were going. I hadn't thought of it before you mentioned it but it does have the same feel. iOS devices are growing by leaps and bounds. Just as when the Mac became a more powerful and versatile system than the AppleII, the iPad is rapidly approaching the same point, where you will be able to do everything you can on a Mac and more, on iOS. Once that happens a lot of people will jump ship.
I know that a lot of you are saying that the Mac is a dying product. But I say that it isn't for one reason and it is a big reason: Developers. As things stand right now, you have to have a Mac in order to be able to develop for iOS. Sure, there are things out there like React Native; but you still have to have the Mac in order to be able to publish it. So for that alone, I say the Mac will live on.
1. USB-C isn’t what enables mouse support. First, most mice (“mouses”) are USB-A or Bluetooth. And Apple no longer sells a wired mouse of any kind, so if they really wanted to support an iPad mouse, they’d go Bluetooth.
2. The only time I want a mouse on my iPad is when I run software like Citrix Receiver to connect to corporate computers (usually Windows). Citrix already sells a mouse for iOS users of their app: https://youtu.be/9R6WcZkz-Ik (and it works well)
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
This will in no way impact your use of an iPad in tablet mode. It simply adds additional functionality to an already great product. Or, put another way: Instead of "adding functionality" one could claim it removes a limitation without impacting the other functions of the iPad.
T O L D Y A S O ! I've been saying this was needed for a couple years now and getting beat up on this forum for saying so. Now, reading the comments here, I think I see the main objection: It's not (as people WERE saying) going to destroy the iPad (that was a stupid argument from the beginning). But, it seems most are afraid it will eliminate the need and/or market for Macs. To that, I say: "I doubt it".
A MacBook has its own unique attributes and does certain things really well. An iPad with a cursor adds flexibility and functionality to the iPad -- but it simply won't have the robustness that a MacBook can offer simply because adding a mouse to an iPad requires 2 or 3 separate components connected up together. The MacBook does that more neatly, efficiently and effectively in a single unit. Plus, iOS is a simplified, "dummydowned" OS. It doesn't have the robustness of MacOS and neither was it ever meant to. It was meant to be a simple, easy to navigate OS for non-technical people.
No, as I have always said: this just makes the iPad a more potent, powerful, flexible device.
But it won't replace a MacBook. Actually,I think, quite the opposite: It will hopefully push the MacBook team to smooth out some of the wrinkles that people have been complaining about for the past couple years -- a little competition if you will. But I feel certain it is a competition that will have 2 winners: MacBooks and iPads.
It's not absurd at all. I would suggest that you're simply not looking far enough into the future. Making it easier for iOS developers to target the Mac standardizes development between the two platforms. The initial and short-term result will be iOS apps coming to the Mac. The long-term result will be Mac and iOS apps using all of the same APIs. Once that happens, the underlying guts of the OS become less important. And while iOS is based on macOS, they are still quite different in many key respects, not the least of which is user access to the Unix layer of macOS.
Okay, this doesn't tell me anything about the future though other than what I said about it making it easier to develop for both OSes.
I think it's very obvious from the way Apple has treated the Mac over the past decade that its heart now belongs to iOS. The Mac Pro has been a joke product for years now. The trashcan Mac Pro wasn't a proper "pro" device, unless you like a rat's nest of wires and stacks of external boxes. Mac prices keep rising, yet the hardware is never cutting-edge. Sometimes it's several years out of date, yet still commands top dollar. Furthermore, Apple is doing more and more to lock the Mac down (T2 chip) as well as limit it's overall usefulness as a Unix platform. They have gutted Server. Each macOS revision sees macOS lose a bit more of its Unix-ness, even if it's not always obvious to the end user.
As for Apple not pushing the Mac, they don't. They've accepted their marketshare glass ceiling and aren't doing anything to break through. They haven't for years. In fact, they do the opposite. They raise prices and further alienate many types of users. The new Mini is a perfect example.
We know there's a new Mac Pro coming this year, no need to keep bringing up the well-known problem of the 2013 MP. The Mac mini by all measures is a great update, except for the minority clamoring for a cheap low end mini which is not their target market anymore. The T2 chip is also a huge benefit for security on the Mac, I welcome it. Server, meh. As far as "lose a bit more of its Unix-ness", I'm not even sure what that means.
In my opinion they are really starting to push more of their user base to iOS and the iPad as a general purpose computing tool. They're happy to milk the Mac, just as they milked the Apple II back in the day, but the focus is now on iOS, just as it was on the Mac back in the twilight days of the Apple II. I find it hard to believe that they will dedicate the resources to porting macOS (as we know it today) to ARM. They could and probably already have, but I don't think they'll bring it to market until most apps use Marzipan. In the end, whether we call it macOS or iOS probably doesn't matter. Long-term they will be one unified OS. Marzipan starts that process. When iOS moves to the desktop, I don't think most users will notice and I think that's very much Apple's goal. What I see being lost, ultimately, from macOS is all of the Unix stuff. Just like one doesn't have access to this part of iOS, I believe macOS will ultimately follow.
You're concluding that "iOS moves to the desktop" which is weird. iOS obviously is for one use case and macOS the other. They've repeatedly said they're not merging the OSes. They're obviously putting a lot of work into macOS (and their hardware, despite what you seem to think). I just don't see the problem in the near or longterm future. There seems to be some conflation that either the Marzipan stuff to aid in cross-platform development or macOS moving to ARM somehow means we're going to be all using dumbed down iPad interfaces on our Macs and I simply don't think that's a rational conclusion.
What is "all of the Unix stuff" that's being lost in macOS?
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
The point is not that tablet should be a PC. There are tasks where a mouse is a better option than the touch screen, even on a tablet. With the Surface, MS gave users the option on which input device he/she prefer to navigate the UI. And the results were postive, considering that a few years ago, the Surface customer satisfaction a little bit higher than iPads. Being able to use touchscreen, trackpad/mouse and even the Pen as a input device did not affect negatively the user experience. And I think that Apple copying MS in giving options to users it's a good thing (considering this rumor is real).
I am also of the opinion that the window metaphor is effectively a failed experiment — I would bet that easily 90% of users use nearly all apps full-screen, even many professionals I know. But there are also credible rumors that floating windows are coming to iPad, so etc.
Wait what? Failed? It’s been the standard for like 35 years. Maybe times are changing and the UI will go elsewhere, but you can hardly call that failed. It’s like saying Horses are a failed experiment because we now use cars. Or saying propeller aircraft were a failed experiment because we now use jets. Time moves on and technology evolves but something that was the standard, that made Microsoft what it is today cannot be called a failed experiment.
I said "failed" because I observe few people using windows as windows. I certainly do and I love it but I know when I'm not a typical user.
Oh and I want to add, Windows 8 came out while I was still doing desktop support. The single most hated feature was the automatic full screen apps. People want to have more than one open at a time. Run the remote desktop, next to their email client, next to the IM client, next to the document they are working on. Drag this text from one app and drop it in another.
That's interesting and a good point.
Why else have a 27+ inch screen, or nowadays two or three? Now the engineers I work with often do use their design apps full screen. They have a second screen for the other things. They also work in the one app to the exclusion of everything, and everyone, else. But for a lot of people the purpose of a big monitor is to have multiple windows open.
Well again I disagree here. Most multi-monitor setups I see have one big ass app in each display.
You believe most people use all fullscreen apps? On a 27” monitor!? Nuh-uh.
Nuh-huh.
If you arent suggesting a merged OS via iOS apps running on Mac, then I’m at a loss to what you’re suggesting, other than they drop the macOS platform entirely, which isn’t happening anytime remotely soon. Perhaps someday, but there’s no reason to believe it’s anything to worry about for a long time. 20 years from now? Maybe.
I literally outlined what I think what a possible timeline for deprecation would be, so
Comments
1. USB-C isn’t what enables mouse support. First, most mice (“mouses”) are USB-A or Bluetooth. And Apple no longer sells a wired mouse of any kind, so if they really wanted to support an iPad mouse, they’d go Bluetooth.
2. The only time I want a mouse on my iPad is when I run software like Citrix Receiver to connect to corporate computers (usually Windows). Citrix already sells a mouse for iOS users of their app: https://youtu.be/9R6WcZkz-Ik (and it works well)
3. I think using a pointer + mouse for native iOS apps misses the point of the tablet form factor. I get that some people think a tablet should be a desktop Windows PC, but I do not, and I do not think Apple thinks this either.
Yet. Marzipan is brand new. It's impossible to say what Marzipan apps will look like, much less be capable of, in a few years. Plus iOS supports multiple windows, just not the overlapping, drag them around the screen metaphor used on the desktop today.
I think the upcoming Mac Pro is the last big hurrah for today's macOS and Intel-based Macs. I think macOS XI is going to be when we see ARM "Macs" running iOS with a macOS-style desktop interface. I'm thinking five years, give or take. That's enough time to fully bake Marzipan and get the majority of developers on board. Once iOS and macOS apps all use UIKit, the guts of the operating system become far less important.
1. Completely agree.
2. If mouse support comes to the iPad, I think it will be app-specific. There are certain types of applications that almost require a mouse. I can't imagine using a CAD application with my finger or the Pencil.
3. Completely agree. I don't see Apple adding a pointer to the broad iOS interface, at least not on the iPad. If and when a desktop iOS variant emerges, I think it will have pointer support and function much like today's macOS. When it comes to the iPad, however, adding a pointer now makes no sense. The entire iPad experience is built on touch, on a direct connection between you and the hardware. You do not manipulate a virtual finger (pointer) on the screen using another device. You touch directly. Even if you're using the Pencil, you still touch the screen. The whole iPhone/iPad experience is built around touch. Touch will always be the primary/preferred method of interacting with the iPhone and iPad in my opinion, but adding mouse support for specific use cases makes a lot of sense.
Oh and I want to add, Windows 8 came out while I was still doing desktop support. The single most hated feature was the automatic full screen apps. People want to have more than one open at a time. Run the remote desktop, next to their email client, next to the IM client, next to the document they are working on. Drag this text from one app and drop it in another. Why else have a 27+ inch screen, or nowadays two or three? Now the engineers I work with often do use their design apps full screen. They have a second screen for the other things. They also work in the one app to the exclusion of everything, and everyone, else. But for a lot of people the purpose of a big monitor is to have multiple windows open.
https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-q4-2018-results-533-billion-revenue-413-million-iphones-116-million-ipads-sold/
Q1 2019 the two lines are closer but it’s Q1:
https://www.macstories.net/news/apple-q1-2019-results-843-billion-revenue-the-first-holiday-quarter-decline-since-the-iphones-introduction/
I also dont believe Apple isn’t excited about Mac. Schiller was recently on ATP and said the opposite. They love their Macs as much as we do. iOS and macOS are different tools for different use cases. If you don’t like today’s Macs I don’t know what’s wrong with ya. Are you really claiming that you need a MP only?
You believe most people use all fullscreen apps? On a 27” monitor!? Nuh-uh.
If you arent suggesting a merged OS via iOS apps running on Mac, then I’m at a loss to what you’re suggesting, other than they drop the macOS platform entirely, which isn’t happening anytime remotely soon. Perhaps someday, but there’s no reason to believe it’s anything to worry about for a long time. 20 years from now? Maybe.
Also sounds like they don’t really understand what Marzipan is. They’re literally just bridging gaps between iOS and macOS to make it easier to target both platforms when building apps. The idea that making it easier for iOS developers to start targeting the Mac as well somehow signals the death of the Mac is absurd for obvious reasons.
It's not absurd at all. I would suggest that you're simply not looking far enough into the future. Making it easier for iOS developers to target the Mac standardizes development between the two platforms. The initial and short-term result will be iOS apps coming to the Mac. The long-term result will be Mac and iOS apps using all of the same APIs. Once that happens, the underlying guts of the OS become less important. And while iOS is based on macOS, they are still quite different in many key respects, not the least of which is user access to the Unix layer of macOS.
I think it's very obvious from the way Apple has treated the Mac over the past decade that its heart now belongs to iOS. The Mac Pro has been a joke product for years now. The trashcan Mac Pro wasn't a proper "pro" device, unless you like a rat's nest of wires and stacks of external boxes. Mac prices keep rising, yet the hardware is never cutting-edge. Sometimes it's several years out of date, yet still commands top dollar. Furthermore, Apple is doing more and more to lock the Mac down (T2 chip) as well as limit it's overall usefulness as a Unix platform. They have gutted Server. Each macOS revision sees macOS lose a bit more of its Unix-ness, even if it's not always obvious to the end user.
As for Apple not pushing the Mac, they don't. They've accepted their marketshare glass ceiling and aren't doing anything to break through. They haven't for years. In fact, they do the opposite. They raise prices and further alienate many types of users. The new Mini is a perfect example. In my opinion they are really starting to push more of their user base to iOS and the iPad as a general purpose computing tool. They're happy to milk the Mac, just as they milked the Apple II back in the day, but the focus is now on iOS, just as it was on the Mac back in the twilight days of the Apple II. I find it hard to believe that they will dedicate the resources to porting macOS (as we know it today) to ARM. They could and probably already have, but I don't think they'll bring it to market until most apps use Marzipan.
In the end, whether we call it macOS or iOS probably doesn't matter. Long-term they will be one unified OS. Marzipan starts that process. When iOS moves to the desktop, I don't think most users will notice and I think that's very much Apple's goal. What I see being lost, ultimately, from macOS is all of the Unix stuff. Just like one doesn't have access to this part of iOS, I believe macOS will ultimately follow.
Marzipan isn’t an environment for hosting iOS apps on macOS, it’s a developer tool to bring iOS apps over and run them *as* macOS apps.
Mouse as input device — accessibility uses aside — is a fridge toaster.
How “highly portable” is a tablet with a mouse? Probably less portable than a machine with a built in trackpad.
If only Apple sold a machine with a 12” screen, a trackpad and with an OS that had software support for an input device that acts like a pointer.
And a protective cover with a keyboard built into it.
If only.
I've been saying this was needed for a couple years now and getting beat up on this forum for saying so.
Now, reading the comments here, I think I see the main objection: It's not (as people WERE saying) going to destroy the iPad (that was a stupid argument from the beginning). But, it seems most are afraid it will eliminate the need and/or market for Macs. To that, I say: "I doubt it".
A MacBook has its own unique attributes and does certain things really well.
An iPad with a cursor adds flexibility and functionality to the iPad -- but it simply won't have the robustness that a MacBook can offer simply because adding a mouse to an iPad requires 2 or 3 separate components connected up together. The MacBook does that more neatly, efficiently and effectively in a single unit. Plus, iOS is a simplified, "dummydowned" OS. It doesn't have the robustness of MacOS and neither was it ever meant to. It was meant to be a simple, easy to navigate OS for non-technical people.
We know there's a new Mac Pro coming this year, no need to keep bringing up the well-known problem of the 2013 MP. The Mac mini by all measures is a great update, except for the minority clamoring for a cheap low end mini which is not their target market anymore. The T2 chip is also a huge benefit for security on the Mac, I welcome it. Server, meh. As far as "lose a bit more of its Unix-ness", I'm not even sure what that means.
You're concluding that "iOS moves to the desktop" which is weird. iOS obviously is for one use case and macOS the other. They've repeatedly said they're not merging the OSes. They're obviously putting a lot of work into macOS (and their hardware, despite what you seem to think). I just don't see the problem in the near or longterm future. There seems to be some conflation that either the Marzipan stuff to aid in cross-platform development or macOS moving to ARM somehow means we're going to be all using dumbed down iPad interfaces on our Macs and I simply don't think that's a rational conclusion.
What is "all of the Unix stuff" that's being lost in macOS?