danvm

AppleZulu said:

The perennial rumor of a Mac/iPad hybrid keeps coming up because the MS Surface is such a sleek, efficient, dominating category killer. 

Seriously. MacOS has to run intensive software on the Mac Pro, with multiple giant screens that ergonomically will not function injury-free as touch screens. Making that OS also work in a touch environment on an iPad is a recipe for widows-like bloatware that tries to do all things, but none very well. 

It’s entirely possible someone in the bowels of the big round building is experimenting, but those experiments are unlikely to ever see the light of day. 

macxpress said:

I think some of this was Apple's design decisions previously. Now that Jony Ive isn't there Apple can design computers that are function over form instead of the latter. You take that along with Apple creating some pretty powerful SoC's Apple can still achieve what they like with efficiency along with a great design people expect from Apple. Apple is only 1.5 releases into its new silicon and they're already approaching what NVIDIA an ATI can do with their high-end cards. I'd like to see what M2 Pro/Max/Ultra/Extreme is, and even the new M3. Before, Apple didn't seem interested in designing products to use the higher end NVIDIA/ATI chips that would make a Mac decent for gaming. Now Apple has to better tools to work with so they're not put in a massive thermal box without releasing some big bulky Mac that is not only heavy, but also loud. 

Hopefully M2 and M3 improve on the already impressive GPU gains Apple has seen and long with Metal 3 improvements, AAA gaming studios will be more on board with developing Mac releases in the future.

I certainly would love to see Apple take more action on gaming. Its a great market, one that will be very tough for them to gain traction in, but perhaps they could get some of it. I would love to get rid of my PC. It gets so hot and its like a big space heater. 

coolfactor said:

This article should be flagged as [Opinion]. It makes no sense to me. If someone needs a full computer, then buy a computer. If they want a tablet, then buy a tablet. Why is the lack of the tablet being a full computer a flaw agains the tablet?

The success of the iPad is *because* of Apple's methodical, calculated evolutionary plan.

canukstorm said:

dewme said:

foregoneconclusion said:

This article is written as if Apple doesn't have any ideas for the iPad themselves and are just grudgingly following the demands of tech media. 

I get that sense as well. 

It may be a shock to some folks to know that Apple actually knows how to build a fully functional desktop/laptop operating system that has everything that is being requested. It's available today and it's called macOS. The iPad was never intended to be just another form factor device capable of running macOS. As great as macOS may be, it's still very much rooted in being an operating system layered on top of a piece of industrial machinery that requires the user to adapt to its needs, not the other way around. People are not born with a notion of files growing on trees or burying personal documents and photos in deep hierarchies of folders. The PC paradigm and many of the UI interactions are based on getting the user to conform to the needs of the machine, or at least to conform to artificial paradigms created by operating system programmers, in some cases, many decades ago. Calling industrial machines that require trained humans to operate "personal computers" was wordplay and a total croc. 

The iPad was intended flip the script on the relationship between people and computers. The iPad attempted to make a version of a computer that conformed to the needs of the person who owns it without bringing along the industrial baggage. When a person writes a letter they just pick up a piece of paper and start writing. When they are done they put it back down on the desk, or maybe slide it into a drawer or a file cabinet. They may turn on some music at the same time, or pick up a newspaper or magazine. I doubt many people are going to lay out 16 magazines on their desk at the same time, alongside the partially completed letter to grandma.

These are probably not perfect analogies, but I believe the original intention of the iPad was to remove as much of the machinery and claptrap that we've had to conform to in order to use computers effectively from a computing device centered around serving our more personal needs. Calling even the original iPad a consumption-only device is disingenuous and narrow minded. It's always had a built-in ability to produce personal and sharable content including documents, drawings, schedules, reminders, inventories, and other such content. Being considered a "production" or "work" tool doesn't have to involve industrial-scale content creation, application development, movie editing, etc. Planting a shrub in my yard is productive, but I don't need a backhoe or excavator to do it, just a hand shovel.

Final point - the iPad never was intended to replace traditional, or what I'd call "industrial based computers with trained human operators." As pointed out in the article, Apple isn't trying to merge iPad and Mac. They may have touted the notion that the iPad could in some cases replace the need for an industrial computer for some folks. But merging one way or the other, including putting a version of macOS on the iPad, would effectively destroy either iPadOS or macOS.

I think the real question boils down to - did Apple succeed in making its vision for what the iPad should be something that a lot of people really want to buy? I'd say yes, and especially so with the massive push they've gotten from the iPhone side. But it's not 100% or universal. The allure of industrial computers is as strong as ever. Generations of people born after PCs and Macs became pervasive have acquired the training and skills to operate those machines. They've made the investment and are motivated to continue to leverage their acquired skills not only in their work but in their personal life. I feel that way at some level too, just like I very much miss driving a car with a manual transmission. At least with Apple I feel like I have the best of both worlds. The Mac and macOS is still around and as exciting and challenging as ever, but so is the iPad, which I vastly prefer for things that are more personal and more immediate and needing a bigger screen than what the iPhone makes available. 

I think iPad is growing toward being a viable laptop replacement, but in a way that is unique to what the iPad is.  This article does a good job of explaining

https://yourappleupdate.substack.com/p/why-running-macos-on-an-ipad-isnt?s=w