asdasd

GeorgeBMac said:

AppleZulu said:

GeorgeBMac said:

AppleZulu said:

GeorgeBMac said:

canukstorm said:

GeorgeBMac said:

dewme said:

flydog said:

I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight.  This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.

I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.

I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.

Yes, I agree.

I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.

They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No".   It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.

On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities.  They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS).   But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped.  It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.

This is the most likely route I see Apple taking.  If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.

Maybe not.   Probably not.

But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace.   They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped.  There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.

So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.

I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing.  But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past.   Why?  As these two guys demonstrated:   it's the old "because I said so" routine.  And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles".   Or, to take it step further:  Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine.  Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine.   That's just silly.  An iPad will cut it in the lower grades.  But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.

Still beating that dead horse, I see. 

1. Apple isn’t going to do the thing you want. No means no. 

2. They have explained why. You just choose to ignore that. 

3. They are not wrong in their decision. Customers are clearly and consistently quite happy with their iPads and their MacBooks. 

1.  We'll see how long they continue to ship a shitty 2 in 1 device.   Or, more correctly a great 1.5 in 1 device (great tablet, shitty laptop).

2.  Yes, they did explain why:   "Because I said so...."  LOL...  As I said earlier the bottleneck lies either in marketing or administration.

3.  So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job.   Got it. 

1. The iPad is designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. It is a great tablet. Calling it a “shitty laptop” is like calling it a “shitty home theater.” 

2. They did explain why. It was designed to be a tablet, not a laptop. You can flip out a keyboard and type on it, but that doesn’t make it a laptop. They’re not trying to make it be a laptop. Likewise, you can watch a movie on it, but that doesn’t make it a home theater. They’re not trying to make it be a home theater.

3. Not at all. I’m saying a customer doesn’t have to lug around an ill-conceived 2-in-1 frankentech device when they just wanted an iPad to be a really great tablet and a MacBook to be a really great notebook computer.

1.  That ended when they added an external keyboard and trackpad or mouse.  Adding those makes it a laptop with a shitty OS.

2.  See #1 above.   And that REALLY ended when Apple started suggesting that it was laptop replacement.  Remember:  "What's a computer?"

3.  When a customer needs a tablet and laptop (a 2 in 1) going with Apple they end up with not a 2 in 1 but 1.5 in 1 -- a good tablet and a shitty laptop.  The solution that I have heard countless times in this forum is "just buy and carry both".

At one time all of your claims were true.   But time marches on and things change.  It's time Apple caught up.

They are saying that it is a laptop replacement for most people, which is it. With the keyboard you can type faster. Mostly its for consumption, not creation. The iPad replaces the laptop for that set of customers who didn't need the Truck ( to use Steve Jobs' analogy), but got one when that was all that was available. but now can use a car. 

And to those of you who think that a macOS app could run on an iPad, that might be true of a small subset of applications, but that isn't macOS on the iPad. Just as running some iOS apps on macOS doesn't turn macOS into iOS.

"3.  So you're saying a customer has to buy and lug around two devices when one should be able to do the job.   Got it.  "

So you are saying.... is always a straw man argument. I don't have an iPad because I have a laptop. I "lug around" my iPhone when walking about. 

Most people need 1 or 2 out of 3 of a phone, laptop and tablet. Almost nobody needs 3 of 3. If you want the laptop experience the new AIR, which is cheaper than some iPads, is for you. 

GeorgeBMac said:

asdasd said:

GeorgeBMac said:

9secondkox2 said:

Inside 5 years, the iPad will run Mac OS. 

Yeh, or iPadOS will be upgraded to the point where it's unnecessary.   But one of the two. 

The current situation is a machine very capable of running in laptop mode from a hardware perspective but doing it with an OS that isn't fully capable of doing laptop type work in a user friendly, efficient way -- which makes for a poor user experience.

MacOS on a touch screen device will never ever happen. The company has been clear on this. And it’s even more clear now with Craig’s testimony on the problems with Mac security. 

Whatever thwarted version of the Mac you think could run on the iPad would be a disaster for security on the iPad or be totally throttled. 

When you add an external keyboard and mouse it is no longer a "Touch  screen device".   it's a laptop with a shitty OS.

Doesn't matter, it is nowhere near macOS nor is it supposed to be. Its just another and not very good interface, basically there to help people type more than anything else. It is not and does now mean that the iPad is going to be anything like macOS either. 

GeorgeBMac said:

canukstorm said:

GeorgeBMac said:

dewme said:

flydog said:

I doubt any of us 11" users would have complained about the extra 1/2 milimeter and and 1.5 ounces of extra weight.  This decision was driven by cost and supply concerns.

I would certainly not complain. The overall size is the biggest difference for me. I own a 12.9" iPad Pro and it's my least favorite iPad because it's simply too big, at least as a traditional tablet. If you recast the 12.9" iPad Pro as more of a touch screen notebook by attaching a keyboard & trackpad, that's a whole different story. The only issue then is that you're now up into MacBook Air/Pro price territory so the functional pros/cons for your specific needs becomes the deciding factor. In my mind the 12.9" iPad Pro is on the purchase decision matrix against MacBooks, not other iPads.

I hear exactly what the engineers are saying regarding iPadOS vs macOS. But I still overlay my own skepticism and think that they are both: 1) touting the company line and 2) stating a current state of conditions that are bound to limitations that other engineers within Apple are working very diligently to overcome. It's not unheard of for Apple to say one thing based on a current reality and to then create a new version of reality by overcoming the limitations or inadequate approaches that others have attempted prior to Apple stepping in and showing everyone how it should have been done in the first place. Nothing is cast in stone. If there is a really good way to converge macOS and iPadOS such that neither side is compromised, Apple will find a way to do it.

Yes, I agree.

I think its telling that they said the two would remain separate -- but gave no justification for that decision.

They explained why the 11" didn't get the upgraded display (even though their answer may be mostly bullshit) but for adding Bootcamp to the iPad it was just a straight, simple unexplained "No".   It strongly suggests that the decision to keep them separate is a marketing, administrative or ideological one rather than a technical one.

On the other hand, they may not be going that route because they intend to bring iPadOS up to MacOS abilities.  They have been doing that (it's part of the reason why the split it off from iOS).   But, they've been doing it at a snail's pace -- they even tried to hide the addition of the cursor as an accessibility feature for the handicapped.  It suggests that there are purists in the iPad development team that don't want to contaminate their pure product -- even though that limits its functionality and usefulness to the user.

This is the most likely route I see Apple taking.  If they're adamant about letting the two platforms remain distinct, I don't see macOS coming to the iPad whether running natively or via a virtual machine.

Maybe not.   Probably not.

But, they've been working on upgrading iPadOS for years now and its racing ahead at a snail's pace.   They even tried to hide the addition of cursor behind it being an "Accessibility" feature for the handicapped.  There appears to be resistance on the iPad team to upgrading iPadOS to making it a viable 2 in 1 machine.

So, now that the M1 can handle it, simply adding Bootcamp to the iPad solves that problem quickly and fairly easily -- or far more quickly and far more easily that upgrading iPadOS which has been going on for years now and likely still has years yet to go.

I see 2 in 1's as the future of high end mobile computing.  But both the Mac line and iPad line are stuck in the past.   Why?  As these two guys demonstrated:   it's the old "because I said so" routine.  And that doesn't sell computers or satisfy customers -- especially when the answer to their question is: " just spend another grand or two on a second machine to do what you need -- then lug both of them around, along with your dongles".   Or, to take it step further:  Apple will never be a force in education (which they announced a few years back that they want to be) without a 2 in 1 machine.  Schools are not going to buy every student a second machine.   That's just silly.  An iPad will cut it in the lower grades.  But, by Middle School the student ALSO needs a laptop.

Are you claiming to be a programmer? Because you are clearly technically illiterate on this. The very fact that you think that the M1 chip has anything to do with this, or that you can just throw away questions with "it's just programming" indicates that. 

And 2 in 1s are not the future of computing. The surface is getting slated. 

Theres no technical or financial reason for Apple to do this. Mac OS on an iPad will clearly reduce Mac sales, if it even worked.
It would be a security nightmare and a UI disaster.  They have been clear all along that the tablet market and the PC market are different. 

Steve Jobs could not be clearer on the diasctintion and on which type of device is going to win, he believed we were in the post PC era, and if you look at the stats he was right. The only thing he got wrong was that the tablet market itself didn't grow as he expected, because of the fact that Phone sizes grew.

GeorgeBMac said:

9secondkox2 said:

Inside 5 years, the iPad will run Mac OS. 

Yeh, or iPadOS will be upgraded to the point where it's unnecessary.   But one of the two. 

The current situation is a machine very capable of running in laptop mode from a hardware perspective but doing it with an OS that isn't fully capable of doing laptop type work in a user friendly, efficient way -- which makes for a poor user experience.

MacOS on a touch screen device will never ever happen. The company has been clear on this. And it’s even more clear now with Craig’s testimony on the problems with Mac security. 

darkvader said:

tedz98 said:

I have a new strategy for Mac purchases: I’m buying a Mac mini M1 and a nice monitor. I’ll buy a low end Mini which makes it affordable and easy to upgrade by replacing it. This way I can have the benefits of new compute technology every 2-3 years without having to pay for the cost of the monitor.

My strategy is to pick up Intel Macs for as cheap as I can as quickly as I can.  I'm not going to M1, I've been through too many architecture changes already, and I'm not doing this one.  I've used the M1s, and contrary to the reports, they're slower than Intel in real world use.

I figure the last Mac I'll ever get will be an Intel Mac Pro in a few years.  Maybe a 16" Intel MBP.  And that'll be it for the Mac, I'm already making friends with Xubuntu.

They are clearly faster. And with astonishing battery life.