iPadOS 15 confirms Apple's M1-equipped iPad Pro is a V8 engine powering a Ford Pinto

24567

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 128
    williamlondonwilliamlondon Posts: 1,114member
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    THIS! As usual, perfectly stated, perfectly logical, and sadly ignored or simply incomprehensible to people seeking and demanding a reason to complain about their first world problems.
    Perhaps so, but it is still a very valid question that AI is asking. Software limited by hardware is quite a different thing than hardware limited by software, in this case an OS where a far more powerful sibling already exists. I hope that a lot of people hold off on buying iPP until Apple either gives in and unlocks its potential with an iPOS update or at least communicates their intention to do so.
    Thanks for proving my point.
    pscooter63Rayz2016watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 128
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,313member
    Didn’t AI recently publish an article about how the iPad Pro, even with its multi-gigabytes of system RAM, was still setting a HARD LIMIT on how much RAM an application can utilize? That pretty much tells you everything you need to know about why the current XCode will not run on the iPad Pro.

     iPadOS != macOS

    There are more underlying architectural differences between macOS and iPadOS than you may believe, despite the fact that they are rooted in a common code base at the kernel level. As long as Apple is intent on maintaining and enhancing Mac and iPad separately there will always be a gap between these two products. The “solution” to the Blown Pinto dilemma is to put macOS on the iPad Pro, the “MS Surface Model,” but Apple has not yet demonstrated a desire to do so.

    The problem with Surface Model is that it is a compromise. Another phrase for “compromise” is “both sides are losing something.” For Surface this means a shitty tablet user experience for tablet aficionados and a puny ass screen for desktop PC aficionados. With compromise everyone loses something. Apple is not yet willing to commit to pushing this sort of compromise on its customers. 

    As far as XCode is concerned, in a two OS model, Apple would either have to dumb down XCode or smarten up Swift Playgrounds. As a developer I always prefer to start with a clean slate and would go for the latter approach of incrementally adding more capability to the newer and less complex implementation. This approach does not have to deal with legacy cruft. Dumbing down XCode from the top is bound to cause a lot more problems because you have to constantly ask the question “Who am I screwing out of a feature that they’ve counted on being there for years?” Building from the bottom has no such concern because they can’t miss what they never had.

    If you’ve ever worked a real software product you would know that adding features is easy. Removing features is terribly difficult. 

    Microsoft dealt with this by having two separate products, Visual Studio (in many versions) on top and Visual Studio Code building from the bottom and gradually adding more features and capabilities over time. Will these two products ever converge? I doubt it because the “top end” product continues to grow and add features for ever larger and more expansive requirements, like integrated DevOps support and cloud (Azure). I think Apple will encounter many of the same concerns and doesn’t want to hold back the top end product by chaining it to what they still see as a less capable platform. We may all be enamored with the M1 today, but in a few years the M1 will be the 8088 of Apple’s SoC lineup with far more capable chips overshadowing the M1.

    Finally, building in overcapacity is a way of life for many new products. Over time the workload thrown at the product may consume some of the capacity, but this is not always the case. I live in a household with two people and four bathrooms. Is this a Blown Pinto problem? Maybe we should “go pro” and start visiting Chipotle far more often to justify the excess bathroom capacity? 
    williamlondongatorguypscooter63jasenj1Hyperealityh4y3sRayz2016watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 128
    WgkruegerWgkrueger Posts: 352member
    Apple made a mistake in managing perceptions in the iPad Pro. If they had followed their past updates they would have put the a14x into the 2021 Pro and everything that followed on would have been “normal” with the same folks either praising or complaining about the new features of iPadOS 15. Instead everyone sees the M in the M1 chip, no thanks to Apple btw, and somehow can’t get past the coincidence of the same letter being in macOS. 

    I for one and excited about the real advancements going on, not the hyped up low hanging fruit fake angst that people claimed to be outraged over. Anyone with the least bit of imagination can see some exciting times for the Apple software and hardware ecosystem and I suspect that once the iOS/iPadOS 15/macOS 12 combination hits the streets and people start to find out what Apple can do with the combination of a consolidated hardware and software platform can accomplish we’ll see a change of tune, except of course, for those who think trolling somehow brings something to the conversation (it doesn’t). 

    Fidonet127JBSloughwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 128
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    THIS! As usual, perfectly stated, perfectly logical, and sadly ignored or simply incomprehensible to people seeking and demanding a reason to complain about their first world problems.
    Perhaps so, but it is still a very valid question that AI is asking. Software limited by hardware is quite a different thing than hardware limited by software, in this case an OS where a far more powerful sibling already exists. I hope that a lot of people hold off on buying iPP until Apple either gives in and unlocks its potential with an iPOS update or at least communicates their intention to do so.
    Thanks for proving my point.
    it's cute that you thought that I did, but you do you boo.
    ITGUYINSDwilliamlondonMplsPpscooter63
  • Reply 25 of 128
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 1,385member
    ITGUYINSD said:
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    "Out of the gate"?  iPadOS 14.5 was what was on the iPad Pro M1 out of the gate.  To be honest, what I saw on WWDC should have been iPadOS 14.6.  
    When there is a major version number change, I expect big changes.  iPadOS 15 has been in the works for quite a while.  Apple had plenty of time to design it to utilize the power of the M1 platform.  Instead we get pretty much nothing.  I think that is the point being made here.
    Fortunately, Apple doesn’t build its plans around fiduciary quarters or itchy chat forum myopia. The M1 iPad hardware surely foreshadows interesting plans for coming years, despite all the kids who demand to be served cake as an appetizer. 
    williamlondonWgkruegerRayz2016watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 128
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,991member
    vukasika said:
    Until there’s an improved iPadOS software, there really hasn’t been a reason to honestly purchase a new iPad since 2018. 
    Yet millions upon millions of iPads HAVE been sold and Apple continues to dominate the tablet space. So please explain yourself. What? A few fake techies give a thumbs down on Apple and the iPad becomes DOA? 
    williamlondontmayWgkruegerRayz2016watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 128
    CuJoYYCCuJoYYC Posts: 73member
    This is a much more realistic view of iPad Pro and its core users and a view that pretty much sums up my view.


    williamlondontmayjasenj1Wgkrueger
  • Reply 28 of 128
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    THIS! As usual, perfectly stated, perfectly logical, and sadly ignored or simply incomprehensible to people seeking and demanding a reason to complain about their first world problems.
    That argument is neither perfectly stated nor perfectly logical.  It should be ignored though.  It's kinda sad that you find any logic in that quote.  There is none.  Any logic that could have been gleaned that quote was rendered moot by the absence of nuance.  It's simply a  hyperbolic binary argument.  No one is arguing the OS doesn't max out the hardware.  That's an argument manufactured to support a narrative. The argument is, and has been for years, the OS doesn't properly take advantage of the hardware capabilities.  That's far from complaining about maxing out the iPad.  There's a world of difference.  Besides, the requested capabilities wouldn't even max out a last-gen iPad. 


    gatorguyMplsPmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 29 of 128
    ITGUYINSDITGUYINSD Posts: 390member
    AppleZulu said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    "Out of the gate"?  iPadOS 14.5 was what was on the iPad Pro M1 out of the gate.  To be honest, what I saw on WWDC should have been iPadOS 14.6.  
    When there is a major version number change, I expect big changes.  iPadOS 15 has been in the works for quite a while.  Apple had plenty of time to design it to utilize the power of the M1 platform.  Instead we get pretty much nothing.  I think that is the point being made here.
    Fortunately, Apple doesn’t build its plans around fiduciary quarters or itchy chat forum myopia. The M1 iPad hardware surely foreshadows interesting plans for coming years, despite all the kids who demand to be served cake as an appetizer. 
    So iPadOS 15 is an "appetizer"?  When is the main course?  Will there be any "meat" in that course, or do we skip that course and wait even longer to get to the "sweets"? 
    You're vision is to just wait and see, there are better things coming (isn't that always the case)?  In the mean time, the M1, the M1x, the M2 will be overpowered and underutilized until finally, years from now, the M3 comes out and Apple finally gets around to giving us kids our cake?
    edited June 2021 canukstormmuthuk_vanalingamentropys
  • Reply 30 of 128
    Until Apple makes fundamental changes to iPadOS, the M1 chip is a waste of hardware honestly.  The A12z in the 2020 version is just fine.  The only real difference with M1 is the addition of thunderbolt so you can connect to peripherals like 10gbps lan cards, high speed storage, etc. But other than that, there’s nothing about the iPadOS experience that is significantly different on M1 vs the A12x/A12z.  Multi monitor support is still limited to 4x3 and does not scale to the 16x9 or 16x10 aspect ratio of monitors.  iPadOS has some fundamental limitations, even though the hardware itself has been proven to not be limited in that regard, as M1 and A12x/A12z can run the more complicated window manager of macOS.   And we have to tell the truth.  
    I shared my thinking around this on another a few weeks back. IMO you correctly identify the single biggest issue that people gripe about when talking about limitations of iPad OS and that is multiple monitor support. My thinking is that the extra power off the iPad will be for the yet to be released Apple AR/VR. There are a couple of reasons for this;
    1. Because the iPad is portable, it gives its users the ability to engage with Apple glass (or whatever it’ll be called) anywhere they go and not be tied to a desk top. Yes they could have a laptop but the laptop is limited as highlighted in point 2. 
    2. Using a point and click 2-D input that we see with a mouse and desktop combo in a 3-D interface that is AR/VR would be very limiting. 
    3. iOS users are accustomed to already using touch and gesture first interface
    4. Having LiDAR on the iPad enables it to read your in air hand gestures without needing additional equipment. So now you can have as much screen real estate as you want with nothing more than an iPad Pro and ‘Apple Glasses’
    You’re on set for a shoot and want to bring some editing equipment. You could pack up the desktop and 2 or 3 monitors per editor along with all the cables and power you’ll need to drive those devices, not to mention furniture to support it and the users; OR, you can just pack your iPad Pro and Apple glasses (possibly more than one pair could be supported by the iPad at once) and that’s it. I just thought of this use case scenario, but I’m already imagining more. 
    sconosciutowatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 128
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,582member
    vukasika said:
    Until there’s an improved iPadOS software, there really hasn’t been a reason to honestly purchase a new iPad since 2018. 
    To me the problem isn't really iPadOS but the lack of Apple first party Pro apps to take advantage of the M1 iPad Pro.  This is where Apple should take the lead being the platform owner and creator. When SJ introduced the first iPad in 2010, he demoed iWork. When he introduced the iPad 2 in 2011, he demoed Garageband and iMovie. Since then Apple hasn't demoed anymore first party apps. It would have been great if Apple introduced the M1 iPad Pro demoing FCP and / or LP reimagined for the iPad Pro.  There is literally only a handful of apps for iPad Pro that can truly be classified as Pro apps.  If Apple can't be bothered to make Pro apps available for the M1 iPad Pro why should third parties?

    This video sums up my sentiments


    edited June 2021 gatorguymuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 32 of 128
    hmlongcohmlongco Posts: 374member
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    THIS! As usual, perfectly stated, perfectly logical, and sadly ignored or simply incomprehensible to people seeking and demanding a reason to complain about their first world problems.
    As was pointed out, an A12Z powered the developer test Mac mini just fine. That being the case, there's no real reason to suppose that the previous generation would be left behind. 
    MplsPnhughesmuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 128
    hmlongcohmlongco Posts: 374member
    I was so sure that Apple was going to figure out some cool way of taking the iPad Pro with M1 in a "Microsoft Surface" direction when paired with the Apple Keyboard/Trackpad that I ordered a new iPad Pro with M1 on the first day it was available.

    They didn't.

    I just cancelled the order.

    Should Apple reconsider, so will I.
    williamlondonMplsPnhughesmuthuk_vanalingamright_said_fred
  • Reply 34 of 128
    jpellinojpellino Posts: 672member
    Honestly, why wait for Apple to change this eventually - just buy a MBA M1.  By the time you outfit the iPad Pro 12.9 with a keyboard, you are close to the same weight, the limits are off, you save a few hundred bucks, and you will lose only the pen capability ( so get Sidecar on existing iPad 6+, mini5 or Air 3+, or even a $99 Wacom BT tablet if pen input is required) and FHD camera which you already have on your existing iPhone or iPad.
    gatorguydewme
  • Reply 35 of 128
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 1,385member
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    THIS! As usual, perfectly stated, perfectly logical, and sadly ignored or simply incomprehensible to people seeking and demanding a reason to complain about their first world problems.
    That argument is neither perfectly stated nor perfectly logical.  It should be ignored though.  It's kinda sad that you find any logic in that quote.  There is none.  Any logic that could have been gleaned that quote was rendered moot by the absence of nuance.  It's simply a  hyperbolic binary argument.  No one is arguing the OS doesn't max out the hardware.  That's an argument manufactured to support a narrative. The argument is, and has been for years, the OS doesn't properly take advantage of the hardware capabilities.  That's far from complaining about maxing out the iPad.  There's a world of difference.  Besides, the requested capabilities wouldn't even max out a last-gen iPad. 


    …because customers would be extremely angry that their expensive, 18-month old iPad has already been rendered obsolete by the operating system. 

    Having dabbled about these forums for a few years now, there are several themes that repeat over and over, ad nauseum. One of those is constant complaints about Apple not adopting some cutting-edge new feature or hardware component. Another is constant complaints about Apple insidiously planning obsolescence, choking off perfectly good old hardware to force users into spending money on new hardware. 

    This thread represents the former, predictably following every OS update and announcement of new hardware. It always generates a tempest in a teapot, but doesn’t appear to harm sales or broader customer satisfaction. 

    The latter complaint also predictably follows every OS and hardware update, but it also generates actual lawsuits and actions that cost money. It doesn’t matter that the physics of lithium ion batteries is what it is, or how increasingly far back new OS updates support old hardware. People still holding the old stuff vigorously resent the demands that an OS written to take some good advantage of hardware with many multiples of the capacity of their old models place on their vintage gear. So they sue. 

    If it seems binary, that’s because it is binary. Oddly, even though the resentments of both camps predictably appear in these forums, they rarely engage each other, because doing so would require acknowledging that support of front- and back-edge hardware happens in the same OS, and that decisions about one end of the scale must affect the other. Neither camp wants to acknowledge that fact because it forces contemplation of necessary compromise, which in turn necessarily takes all the fun and indignation out of one’s manufactured rage. 
    williamlondonforegoneconclusionthtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 128
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,662member
    ITGUYINSD said:
    AppleZulu said:
    So Apple releases expensive hardware with obvious capacity for future expansion of operating system capabilities, and the complaint is that the OS doesn’t max out the hardware out of the gate. Got it.

    Of course, if iPadOS already took full advantage of the capabilities of the M1 model, there would be much louder complaints about how last year’s pre-M1 hardware has been rendered obsolete so quickly by OS features the pre-M1 devices can’t handle. 
    "Out of the gate"?  iPadOS 14.5 was what was on the iPad Pro M1 out of the gate.  To be honest, what I saw on WWDC should have been iPadOS 14.6.  
    When there is a major version number change, I expect big changes.  iPadOS 15 has been in the works for quite a while.  Apple had plenty of time to design it to utilize the power of the M1 platform.  Instead we get pretty much nothing.  I think that is the point being made here.
    Exactly. After the latest iPad Pro was introduced, many people lamented the lack of software and how iOS was limiting it. Plenty of others said "just wait for iPadOS 15 - that will be a game changer." Well, iPadOS 15 is here and the game hasn't changed. We've been given a couple new pieces to play with but it's more like Apple is playing games. ITGUYINSD's statement that iPadOS 15 should really be 14.6 is right on target.

    Multiple people have pointed out that the previous generation was already hamstrung by iPadOS. That hasn't changed - there is nothing in iPadOS 15 that the last 2 generations of iPad can't handle with aplomb. If the A12x can power a Mac mini, doesn't that say something? The analogy in the article is perfect. We have a 355 V8 engine in a Ford Pinto. Driving on a parkway. In a parade. 
    williamlondonnhughesmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 37 of 128
    canukstorm said: There is literally only a handful of apps for iPad Pro that can truly be classified as Pro apps.  If Apple can't be bothered to make Pro apps available for the M1 iPad Pro why should third parties?
    FYI: the iPad software market doesn't support prices that are as high as the Mac software market. It's always been like that. That's the first thing to consider when you're wondering why certain high-priced applications aren't available. There is no 1:1 correlation between what iPad users are willing to spend and what Mac users are willing to spend. iPad users expect cheaper prices. That expectation can limit what is made available. I already used the Xbox analogy earlier in this thread. An M1 can blow through Xbox One games, but do you see MS rushing to release a bunch of Xbox One ports on iPadOS just because they would run well? Price. They won't get the price they want on iPadOS. 
    edited June 2021 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 128
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,662member
    vukasika said:
    Until there’s an improved iPadOS software, there really hasn’t been a reason to honestly purchase a new iPad since 2018. 
    To me the problem isn't really iPadOS but the lack of Apple first party Pro apps to take advantage of the M1 iPad Pro.  This is where Apple should take the lead being the platform owner and creator. When SJ introduced the first iPad in 2010, he demoed iWork. When he introduced the iPad 2 in 2011, he demoed Garageband and iMovie. Since then Apple hasn't demoed anymore first party apps. It would have been great if Apple introduced the M1 iPad Pro demoing FCP and / or LP reimagined for the iPad Pro.  There is literally only a handful of apps for iPad Pro that can truly be classified as Pro apps.  If Apple can't be bothered to make Pro apps available for the M1 iPad Pro why should third parties?

    This video sums up my sentiments


    It's a bit of a catch 22 - how much of the lack of application development is because of the lack of an OS that can run it?
    williamlondondewme
  • Reply 39 of 128
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,730member
    hmlongco said:
    I was so sure that Apple was going to figure out some cool way of taking the iPad Pro with M1 in a "Microsoft Surface" direction when paired with the Apple Keyboard/Trackpad that I ordered a new iPad Pro with M1 on the first day it was available.

    They didn't.

    I just cancelled the order.

    Should Apple reconsider, so will I.
    FFS,

    Apple has stated, over and over again, that it wasn't going to make a hybrid.

    Furthermore, nobody cares if you canceled your order for the iPad Pro, but you sure showed Apple who's boss, somehow!

    williamlondonpscooter63kiltedgreenwatto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 128
    gromovgromov Posts: 1member
    ...The biggest disappointment for me continues to be the lack of proper external monitor support. .... It continues to be a glaring omission in the supported hardware area. 
    It is not an omission, but fundamental consequence of the touch interface. How do you expect to interact with the objects on external  non-mirrored monitors that do not support touch input? iPads are touch devices first, and using trackpads and mice is optional. 
    Imagine someone buying an iPad and connecting it to the external monitor only to find that there is no way to interact with its contents without a mouse or trackpad. Apple cannot allow such things.
    The only option is for Apple to start selling touch-enabled monitors as accessories. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.