muthuk_vanalingam

boxcatcher said:

I highly encourage all the super smart MAGA folks to buy this amazing piece of technology! I’m sure it’s super amazing, very secure, and will be a great purchase!

Holy F - people voted for this absolute insanity.

kiltedgreen said:

charlesn said:

kiltedgreen said:

mfryd said:

However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad.   Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.

I have nothing against the iPad OS.   It's a great solution for many (but not all) users.   Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?    

The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX.  iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.  

An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.

Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.

Comments like this convince me that reading comprehension has become a lost skill in America. Pretty aggressive response considering he didn't say that you--or any iPad user--HAD to have their iPad running MacOS. What he said was: "The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX." See? Not only do you not have to run MacOS on your iPad, you don't even have to install it! He would simply like that option for people who do want to install it. And your problem with this request, which would not affect you in the least, is WHAT exactly? I have suggested this as a possibility myself, since Apple Silicon can boot into either OS, and this kind of separate solution doesn't involve ANY compromise in either OS--no need to try and kludge a touchscreen into MacOS or complicate iPadOS--both OSes work exactly as they do now, which is why he specifies the need for a Magic Keyboard folio, because you'll need a keyboard and trackpad for MacOS. Of course, we all know why this will never happen: Apple wants to continue to sell us two devices, not one. It's also why they've resisted ease-of-use functionality in iPadOS (the files system, multitasking, etc) that would make it more of an easy laptop replacement for more people. It's really as simple as that. 

Sorry if it came over as aggression, it was exasperation! My reading comprehension is just fine thank you (and I’m not American). Logistically how would Apple approach selling such a creature? What percentage of iPad users would be the target audience? What advantage does Apple gain from a dual boot iPad? The only dual boot product Apple have ever made is the Intel Mac and that was to another company’s OS - they have NEVER done it with their own OSes.

I doubt Apple could simply take macOS and run it on an iPad anyway as there will be subtle assumptions built into macOS that would not work on an iPad. Then we’d end up with macOS for Mac, macOS for iPad and iPadOS. Maybe some people would like iPadOS to run on their Mac with an M4 Ultra chip, who knows? iPadOS for Mac?

What is exasperating is this never ending fantasy of a portable Mac that isn’t a Mac but an iPad. Or would an iPad be running macOS become a Mac and no longer an iPad? Are these macOS on iPad people desperate for a touch screen Mac or do they just want a Mac with no attached keyboard? Do they want an iPad with apps that have all the same features as the Mac version - if so, contact the company who made the app, it won’t be fixed by changing the OS. What is the end goal of this?

nubus said:

avon b7 said:

The EU requirements are perfectly reasonable for the goals they have in mind.

Apple is the winner on this. Imagine any of those "sell and forget" competitors offering repairability for 7 years.
I do however hope Mother Nature won't visit the next keynote. A card will do!

AppleZulu said:

Waiting for the reality-defying explanation from @9secondkox2 about how this is “all part of the plan.”

Even if Apple thought they could move iPhone manufacturing to the US, it would take years. A 25% tariff now isn’t going to help with that. 

Watch instead for some bluster followed by a reversal. Watch for Trump and his inner circle to buy Apple stock this afternoon and sell after the reversal. 

gatorguy said:

AppleZulu said:

Waiting for the reality-defying explanation from @9secondkox2 about how this is “all part of the plan.”

Even if Apple thought they could move iPhone manufacturing to the US, it would take years. A 25% tariff now isn’t going to help with that. 

Watch instead for some bluster followed by a reversal. Watch for Trump and his inner circle to buy Apple stock this afternoon and sell after the reversal. 

So am I. I suspect he won't post a word. 

charlesn said:

tht said:

If this device is 3% of iPhone sales, it would be an incredible success. 

Nibbling at the edges like that has never been Apple's game. The iPhone Plus has routinely made it into the top ten selling smartphones in the world, and yet Apple is still allegedly cutting it for lack of "sufficient" sales. As for 3% of sales being a gigantic win--how do you figure that? I think you're correct that Fold sales will largely come from cannibalizing Pro Max sales. A mid-tier storage Pro Max sells for $1600. A similar storage Fold might come in at $400 or $500 more. But it's going to be a MUCH more expensive phone to manufacture, not to mention the costs for R&D, tooling and marketing that will go into it. I'm not seeing much added profit at all for Apple in that $400-$500 increase in the selling price over the Pro Max when you consider all of the costs that have to be amortized over a relatively small (for Apple) number of phones that will be sold. 

geekmee said:

Remind me, what problem does this solve again?

It will finally stop the whining on tech sites for Apple to make a folding phone.