Apple reiterates it has no plans to merge iPad and Mac
Apple marketing chief Greg Joswiak maintains that the iPad and the Mac aren't merging anytime soon, despite the inclusion of the M1 chip in the latest iPad Pro models.
Credit: Apple
The Cupertino tech giant on Tuesday unveiled a new 11-inch iPad Pro and 12.9-inch iPad Pro equipped with the M1 Mac chip, and a 24-inch iMac that looks conspicuously like an oversized iPad. That, naturally, has led to speculation that the two product lines could be merging in the future -- a claim Apple has denied.
In an interview with The Independent, Greg Joswiak and Apple hardware chief John Ternus again reiterated Apple's position that the iPad and Mac are two separate product lines, and will stay that way.
Joswiak said Apple has no plans to merge the products. Instead, the addition of the Mac-focused chip is part of the company's continual goal to make each product the best in their own categories.
"There's two conflicting stories people like to tell about the iPad and Mac. On the one hand, people say that they are in conflict with each other. That somebody has to decide whether they want a Mac, or they want an iPad. Or people say that we're merging them into one: that there's really this grand conspiracy we have, to eliminate the two categories and make them one. And the reality is neither is true. We're quite proud of the fact that we work really, really hard to create the best products in their respective category."
Ternus added that Apple isn't going to get "caught up" in theories about merging. "We're pushing to make the best Mac we can make; we're pushing to make the best iPad we can make," he said.
When asked about why Apple decided to equip the new iPad Pro models with an M1 chip instead of an updated A-series chip, Ternus said the iPad Pro models have always been equipped with the best Apple Silicon. At this time, the M1 is "the best."
As far as other tidbits, Joswiak and Ternus also called installing the new mini LED display in the 12.9-inch iPad Pro a "huge undertaking." Ternus also touted the Center Stage feature, saying that it is "liberating" when on a video call with larger groups.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
And Apple were right about both: video on iPod sucked, and music subscription is a really, really shitty idea. But that ship has sailed.
The App Store. We don't need 3rd party apps running on iPhones. Devs can write Web 2.0 and Ajax apps. No SDK needed.! - beep bop boop - App Store.
NFC - We don't think the tech solves any problems. We're going to offer Passbook with QR codes and stuff. beep bop boop - NFC on iPhones.
Small tablets - 10" tablet is the minimum for size for great tablet apps. - beep bop boop - iPad Mini
Large phone - You can't get your hand around it. No one's going to buy it - beep bop boop - big ass iPhones
OLED displays - They're awful - beep bop boop - OLED everywhere
There's more, but I'm fairly sure you get the point I was making by now. It's typical of Apple to say no or deny a thing right up until they release their version of the thing.
Because the video chat use case for a desktop Mac is different from the use case for a mobile device like an iPad or iPhone, would be my guess why they didn't use an ultrawide camera on the iMac.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/12/apple-ceo-tim-cook-learning-to-code-is-so-important.html
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/why-tim-cook-wants-ipads-in-every-classroom-20180413-p4z9fc.html
But you can't code outside of tutorial environments on an iPad, there are restrictions on dynamic code in the OS. Software development is one of Apple's largest segments of pro users. Dynamic code is also used for scripting and plugins inside creative software.
Take a student of science and art. The iPad allows them to draw, paint and sculpt art in a convenient and comfortable way. The Mac allows them to develop software and have unrestricted access to the filesystem for data, backups, downloads and run all kinds of powerful software.
What they are saying is somewhat true, both these products perform well at those respective tasks but a student of both has to choose between them or buy both.
If they started with an iPad and allow it to run macOS when connected to a keyboard (no touch input) then it would behave no differently from a standard Mac laptop in that mode. It's not a merged OS, it's just allowing the same hardware to perform both functions. The only tricky part would be switching between them, whether the iPad mode is like an app inside macOS that goes fullscreen or it's an OS switch with suspend/resume or macOS runs as a mode inside iPadOS.
Here's a video of how the latter option would look:
The part with touching the macOS UI is obviously not a usable experience, the main Mac use would be around 5:00 with keyboard and mouse/trackpad.
Microsoft has demonstrated that a converged device doesn't work well and this is always what Apple has said they won't do for years, which is convergence. The fridge-toaster:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/tim-cook-customers-dont-want-a-combined-ipad-and-macbook/
https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/04/tim-cook-on-windows-8-converging-a-toaster-and-a-refrigerator
Where convergence goes wrong is when two products perform different functions (fridge and toaster) or are designed for different inputs (Windows with a touch UI). It works very well for things that are complimentary like iPod + GPS + phone + PDA = iPhone. Most of the functions of an iPad and Mac are identical, web browsing takes up most of the usage and is the same on both. Games, email, calendars and so on are the same on both systems. The biggest difference between an iPad and a Mac experience is how the user interacts with it, which is determined by how the user holds the device.
If it's held it like a tablet, nobody wants to be poking at desktop UI elements with their finger, that requires different software.
If it's in a dock like the magic keyboard cover, nobody wants to be poking at the screen at all, the keyboard and trackpad are much more comfortable.
Look at the use case shown in the following video at 6:45:
That's an iPad Pro hooked up to an XDR display. It looks amazing and powerful but in reality not usable at all as it's just mirroring the output and you can't use it like you could a Mac system. If that hardware allowed switching over to the Mac system in that environment, it could do everything a Mac could - run Final Cut, Logic, all the Adobe Suite, Da Vinci, Xcode, Node JS, Python, web servers, app publishing.
It could lead to a problem where people end up preferring the power of macOS on the iPad and that would push towards the system becoming more of a converged mess. There's also the issue that a Mac system on a 10" tablet display is not a good experience either (although it could be scaled up a bit), it would mainly be useful on a 12" model and/or external display. But it would be a much better value product for a student or anyone that only wanted a single device to offer the best experience for both tablet and desktop use.
Looking ahead at other products like AR, that can change things entirely because the interaction is no longer a choice between hand-held tablet or keyboard-based, it's a superset of both. The UI can be as big as it needs to be and allow for touch input.
Maybe iPadOS will just continue to improve to the point it doesn't matter but it's now 11 years in and that would surely have been the case by now. Apple's preference is for people to do some things on iPad and some things on Mac and buy both if they need both. The spec of the new iPad Pro offers an opportunity to have those functions on the same hardware. It would be a neat addition to an iPad, even in a limited form to be able have the extra freedom and power macOS offers when the need arises.
They’ve been saying this perfectly clearly for years now. Does that mean there will never be a next-thing? No. But Jos was clear, just like Craig was clear.
They could easily make the UI work (literally just have ipadOS become the tablet mode). The PC market has proved that 2-in-1s can be great devices - the issue is the software, not the hardware.
But nope, that would sabotage sales, so no dice there.
I refuse to buy both, so I'll stick with an iPhone and a 2-in-1 PC until they get real.
All the examples you gave about Apple changing its stance resulted in additional products or enhanced products (iPod, iPod Photo. iPad, iPad Mini, iPad Pro, iPad Air) that gave more choice and resulted in greater sales.
If they merged iPadOS and macOS, it would result in less choice and fewer products being sold - unlike now, when so many people buy iPads and Macs.
From a pure commercial standpoint, it makes no sense for Apple.
Yes they can run some iOS apps into macOS where they work badly in the absence of a touch screen ( but developers could always do that), but merging macOS into iOS would either remove macOS, annoying all of us who want a desktop system, or it would be macOS.
macOS > iOs, at least in terms of software. In terms of hardware gimcracks iOS has haptic responses, GPS, accelerometer. Apps written for iOS using these are useless on macOS.
I have an M1 and I use the iOs apps very rarely. I just tried a weather app and it looks just about ok. It is is a resizable window but the layout isn't very Mac like. Tabs are at the bottom, not the top. Probably these should be in a sidebar. A dedicated Mac app would have a menu item as well.
(With SwiftUI they have handled this with the same code base producing different outputs. What appears as a navigation to a second screen on iOS appears as master details on Mac and iPad. )