thedba

k2kw said:

Apple “another work around because we won’t allow you to run MacOs on the iPad.”

If you want to run MacOS, then get a Mac. 
If you want to run iPadOS, then get an iPad. 

I think your expectations were way too high for iPadOS at WWDC21, considering that it is meant to run the same OS that goes into the iPad/iPad mini/iPad Air.

If you want to replace your aging Mac, then get another Mac. 
If on the other hand you want or can complement your existing workflow with an iPad then the iPad Pro is a great tool. I already know how I can complement (not replace) my workflow with it. 
On top of that, the iPad is my most used device when I'm not working. 

Appleish said:

Sigh. Apple needs to FORCE content providers to use their tech standards so all apps work the same. Make the 'walled garden' work in our favor. Our discounted rate just ended. Goodbye HBO Max.

I 2nd that.
Another app which moved away from Apple’s design standards is DAZN.
On the trackpad Siri remote, when you swipe down, all apps bring up the Home/Subtitles/Audio menu. Netflix/Prime Video/TV+ are all consistent.
Not DAZN, swiping down brings the multi view menu on their app.
Very annoying if you ask me.

mvmaastricht said:

asdasd said:

mvmaastricht said:

dotcomcto said:

I really want to hear Apple announce that M1 apps from the Mac App Store will be able to run directly on the M1 iPad Pro. I just don't get the purpose of a 16 GB RAM/1 or 2 TB M1 iPad Pro unless the device will be able to run Mac apps (vs 8 GB RAM/256 or 512 GB models). I suppose I get it for high end video editing, but other than that, I don't get its purpose otherwise.

I think Apple will, but not the way you think or hope for, or anyone seems to be aware of. 

It seems obvious to me that Apple will make the iPad Pro instantly dual boot: as soon as you’ll connect your mouse or an external screen, iPadOS will offer to switch to macOS, effectively converting you 13” iPad in a 13” ‘MacBook’. Why not? That wouldn’t be a compromise, for the screen as well as the rest of the hardware of the iPad Pro is perfectly capable of running a desktop class OS…   

Disconnecting you screen could simply offer you to return to iOS…

It surprises me that no one else on the internet seems to consider this possibility…?

It’s been mentioned here dozens of times. And still It’s an incredibly stupid idea, like all the merging of macOS and iPadOS ideas. 

I don’t think you’ve read my comment. I’m explicitly NOT talking about merging. I’m talking about being able to distinctly run either macOS or iPadOS on the same device. The iPad Pro (especially the 12.9” version and more especially the exorbitant 16Gb 1Tb+ version) is ready for it.

OK how do you handle it then?
iPad docked in magic keyboard ==> running MacOS.
Undock the iPad and ==> MacOS goes to sleep and iPad OS wakes?
What happens to your Excel spreadsheet in MacOS? It goes to sleep when you undock and don't have access to it any longer because you're now in iPad OS and the Excel version for that OS, is strictly sandboxed? 
What happens to you mobile bank app in iPad OS if you suddenly sit down and dock your iPad to the Magic Keyboard? It disappears? Are you expecting it to automatically transition you to the bank's web page? 
All of this may sound easy but am quite certain that it will cause major headaches to the software engineering team that takes up that challenge, not to mention app developers. 
In the end, if you want a lightweight MacOS device, then MacBook Air may be your best bet. If you wait 'till October you may even get a smaller lighter redesigned for Apple Silicon version of it.  

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

AppleInsider said:

In terms of shipment numbers, Samsung is thought to be producing 80 million units of the display for the new iPhone, with between 120 million and 130 million total OLED panels anticipated to ship to Apple in 2021. For LG, it is apparently aiming for 30 million units for the "iPhone 13," and a total of 50 million overall for the year.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.
Before someone says "Yeah, but Samsung sells more phones",  I don't think they sell as many brand new flagship devices as Apple.

The numbers are impressive.  Apple sells a lot of phones.  The volume of phones is not a reason that Apple didn't put high refresh panels in the 12 Pro.  Samsung had the capability to provide the panels for the 12 Pro/Max.  Apple chose not to put the panel in the 12's.  Whatever their reasoning, it wasn't due to lack of capacity.  

Why would anyone mention Samsung selling more phones?  It would be an irrelevant factoid.  Samsung Display makes panels, not phones.  Don't let petty fanboyism color your commentary.

Any links as to why Apple chose not to include pro motion into the iPhone 12? 

As for the irrelevant factoid comment, I disagree when sites like the Verge, amongst many, tell us about the beautiful displays that Samsung (and some others) put on their phones/tablets while Apple is still using boring LCD or more recently boring 60Hz OLED panels.
Fact remains, if Apple cannot secure tens of millions of certain component for their new iPhones, then that technology is simply not going in and will have to wait for at least a year. 

There may be other reasons too and do share if you have them.

I have no idea why Apple didn't put LTPO panels in the 12 series, but it wasn't due to an inability to secure panels.  Samsung had the capacity.  Pure supposition: Samsung could have required too high of a minimum order guarantee for the LTPO panels.  Apple has already had to pay Samsung twice for missing order minimums on the regular panels.  Starting fresh on the 13 series might make the minimums more palatable.  Who knows.  

You're conflating sites reporting about Samsung phones with info about Samsung panels.  Panels looking good and panel manufacturing are not the same thing.  SDI makes the panels for Samsung and Apple.  Whether Samsung Electronics sells more phones is irrelevant with regards to the panel manufacturing discussed in the article.  Again, it's simply unnecessary fanboyism.

Asking questions isn’t fanboyism. 

Here’s a link to one YouTuber’s analysis stating amongst several possible reasons, supply (others being price, battery life, etc.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pb-CGAkRrkM
Rene Ritchie also talked about it in one of his videos.

You say you don’t know but then state with certainty that Samsung Display had the capacity. 

So where’s your link asserting that SDI had the capacity but Apple didn’t want to for other reasons?

Bud, you didn't ask a question.  You made declarative statements.  1. You said Apple didn't use LTPO because of their staggering numbers.  2.  You went all fanboy talking about someone saying Samsung sells more phones.  Totally unrelated to panel manufacturing.  Nary a question to be found.  

Samsung's capacity is my opinion.  Anecdotally, if they had a pane shortage, it would have been in the news... a lot too since rumors were flying hot and heavy about the 12 receiving LTPO panels.  Even after the 12 didn't get the panels, there was never rumor regarding a shortage of them.  Is that 100% confirmation?  Nope, but I can't ever recall SDI being in a panel deficit.  I've never heard of them not being able to deliver on panels either. Make of that what you will.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.

Above is my original post.  

I said, this is one reason…. Never said it was the only reason. 

Then you chime in, with guns cocked and firing the “fanboy” accusation. After several exchanges you keep using the term “fanboy” but never provide any evidence to support your argument that it’s definitely not SDI’s incapacity to provide those panels to Apple in the required numbers. 

Finally we get a sort of admission, that it’s only your opinion. 

I’ll change my stance if you provide me with evidence/links that what you’re saying is true. Calling me a “fanboy” and then saying “it’s only your opinion”, will have the exact opposite effect. 

I said this is fanboyism→ "Before someone says "Yeah, but Samsung sells more phones",  I don't think they sell as many brand new flagship devices as Apple."  It is.
I said "It's my opinion" is about SDI panel supply.  Two entirely different things. Not even remotely related.  Whether or not you change your stance isn't my concern.  Believe what you want.  Our opinions differ.  No big deal.  

No fanboyism in stating the obvious. 
iPhone Average selling price: $800 https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-iphone-average-selling-price-2018-2?op=1.  (Back from 2018)
Samsung Average selling price: $292 https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/technology/average-selling-price-of-samsung-smartphones-reaches-a-six-year-high-in-q1-2020-report-5411611.html (Q1 2020 figures)

Point still stands. Apple sells far more flagship devices than Samsung.
And once again you have provided zero evidence other than calling me names and your opinion. 

P.S. Another poster (TMay) has provided links for you. We’ll soon find out if you conclude that he’s a “fanboy” too.  

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

AppleInsider said:

In terms of shipment numbers, Samsung is thought to be producing 80 million units of the display for the new iPhone, with between 120 million and 130 million total OLED panels anticipated to ship to Apple in 2021. For LG, it is apparently aiming for 30 million units for the "iPhone 13," and a total of 50 million overall for the year.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.
Before someone says "Yeah, but Samsung sells more phones",  I don't think they sell as many brand new flagship devices as Apple.

The numbers are impressive.  Apple sells a lot of phones.  The volume of phones is not a reason that Apple didn't put high refresh panels in the 12 Pro.  Samsung had the capability to provide the panels for the 12 Pro/Max.  Apple chose not to put the panel in the 12's.  Whatever their reasoning, it wasn't due to lack of capacity.  

Why would anyone mention Samsung selling more phones?  It would be an irrelevant factoid.  Samsung Display makes panels, not phones.  Don't let petty fanboyism color your commentary.

Any links as to why Apple chose not to include pro motion into the iPhone 12? 

As for the irrelevant factoid comment, I disagree when sites like the Verge, amongst many, tell us about the beautiful displays that Samsung (and some others) put on their phones/tablets while Apple is still using boring LCD or more recently boring 60Hz OLED panels.
Fact remains, if Apple cannot secure tens of millions of certain component for their new iPhones, then that technology is simply not going in and will have to wait for at least a year. 

There may be other reasons too and do share if you have them.

I have no idea why Apple didn't put LTPO panels in the 12 series, but it wasn't due to an inability to secure panels.  Samsung had the capacity.  Pure supposition: Samsung could have required too high of a minimum order guarantee for the LTPO panels.  Apple has already had to pay Samsung twice for missing order minimums on the regular panels.  Starting fresh on the 13 series might make the minimums more palatable.  Who knows.  

You're conflating sites reporting about Samsung phones with info about Samsung panels.  Panels looking good and panel manufacturing are not the same thing.  SDI makes the panels for Samsung and Apple.  Whether Samsung Electronics sells more phones is irrelevant with regards to the panel manufacturing discussed in the article.  Again, it's simply unnecessary fanboyism.

Asking questions isn’t fanboyism. 

Here’s a link to one YouTuber’s analysis stating amongst several possible reasons, supply (others being price, battery life, etc.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pb-CGAkRrkM
Rene Ritchie also talked about it in one of his videos.

You say you don’t know but then state with certainty that Samsung Display had the capacity. 

So where’s your link asserting that SDI had the capacity but Apple didn’t want to for other reasons?

Bud, you didn't ask a question.  You made declarative statements.  1. You said Apple didn't use LTPO because of their staggering numbers.  2.  You went all fanboy talking about someone saying Samsung sells more phones.  Totally unrelated to panel manufacturing.  Nary a question to be found.  

Samsung's capacity is my opinion.  Anecdotally, if they had a pane shortage, it would have been in the news... a lot too since rumors were flying hot and heavy about the 12 receiving LTPO panels.  Even after the 12 didn't get the panels, there was never rumor regarding a shortage of them.  Is that 100% confirmation?  Nope, but I can't ever recall SDI being in a panel deficit.  I've never heard of them not being able to deliver on panels either. Make of that what you will.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.

Above is my original post.