Good enough to be the PC?

[Shirasaki]

It's not a total replacement, but the question is when does this get good enough to be good enough

Subjective. Everyone has their own definition of “good enough”, and Apple must draw a line somewhere, pleasing some while displeasing others. They did that multiple times and we all know the result.

but it turned out to do neither more than it made, and a category of tablet was established.

Tablet as in a mobile device with large display and ability to connect to cellular (optional). To me tablet was And still is a blown up phone running phone software, particularly the iPad. Yes, there are surface laptop, but those are more of a 2-in-1 than tablet In many aspects.

People like all-in-one stuff when it's good enough.

I used to think having a powerful large screen iPhone was good enough. No longer when I had to lug around my MacBook Air running off of battery just to loop back my cellular and play games, or more recently use iPad majority of the time for years and relegate iPhone to phone things. Even the max size can’t compete with iPad pro 11” screen size. Again, “good enough“ is highly subjective.

It also doesn't mean the end of new products… for example, what if you had a phone that plugged into a laptop like the NexDock, but the phone got a boost of sorts? Doubles its cores, or adds a better GPU when connected?

So… a MacBook Air? I know what those docks can be, but by the time this sort of acceleration processor is built in, why not just building a laptop out of it?

doing video (they always rush in to these discussions…

Apple has brainwashed fans to believe the ONLY professional use of high performance chips is to do video editing. It can’t be helped, despite the reality is anything But video editing.

most use cases can be handled reasonably well with an A15. If optimised, they'd be fine.

A15? I know iPhone processor performance Gain is quite modest these days, but A15 is a bit on the old side.

The only downside I could see is that this would cut into Mac sales.

Correction: the most obvious Downside Is such hybrid device would cut into Mac sales.

This sounds great. What happens if you lose internet at home. What happens if you are living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford the subscription? What happens if the cloud service is hacked?

I'm also not into surrendering complete control over all my data to one singular location that gatekeeps my access to it. So you forsee this, I forsee data being held hostage.

I make a point of not tying myself to Apple so that I can move my data to any device I wish at will. And I do use cloud services. But my important data resides with me. and unless this model you foresee still gives me the ability to keep my private personal data off the cloud and on my own personal storage, I'm not sure I want to be included in that future.

Your data, your responsibility. Relinquishing your responsibilities towards your data is a silly decision to make. I always hate those people putting their entire lives in the cloud, only to be shocked by cloud service provider terminating their account and rendering all of those data irrecoverable. Why people eager to give up their digital sovereignty is beyond me, as if cloud only life has no downsides, when such life has its downsides.

I’m not saying I agree with it or not. I’m saying that I believe this is where we’re headed.

Which is both unfortunate and frightening. I have no idea about the decision making of those megacorps. But their relentless push towards people giving up their digital sovereignty is disgusting at the very least.

 

[eyoungren]

Your data, your responsibility. Relinquishing your responsibilities towards your data is a silly decision to make. I always hate those people putting their entire lives in the cloud, only to be shocked by cloud service provider terminating their account and rendering all of those data irrecoverable. Why people eager to give up their digital sovereignty is beyond me, as if cloud only life has no downsides, when such life has its downsides.

And if the future allows me to keep my data, then I'm okay with this. As I mentioned earlier, I do use cloud services - specifically Dropbox. But, I use Dropbox as an offsite storage location. All backups go to my NAS each day and ONE backup of each Mac goes to Dropbox each week. And the important stuff I actually keep on Dropbox gets backed up locally once a day - with those backups going to Dropbox once a week.

But if I'm being told, oh, the device only backs up to the cloud and you don't get to choose which cloud that is, then I'm not good with that future. That's taking control of my data out of my hands to meet some grand design that someone else has declared is now the standard.

 

[Zest28]

Jack of all trades, master of none. Specialised devices have specialised uses. Wanting to make a super device for all can only end up doing no good.

Besides, for screen, iPhone screen can never be as big as iPad. You may argue one can attach a monitor, but then you cannot do touch control on majority of monitors.

If you want a DeX for iOS, sorry but that won’t happen anytime soon either since Apple has iPadOS and macOS to worry about.

It is not specialized hardware. The Mac nowadays also uses iPhone chips, but simply scaled up with more cores and additional controllers. The iPhone can run Mac OS if you connect it to the Apple Studio Display and an additional a bluetooth keyboard + mouse.

Since most people do things like Microsoft Office, an iPhone is overkill in terms of power.

 

[Shirasaki]

It is not specialized hardware. The Mac nowadays also uses iPhone chips, but simply scaled up with more cores and additional controllers. The iPhone can run Mac OS if you connect it to the Apple Studio Display and an additional a bluetooth keyboard + mouse.

Since most people do things like Microsoft Office, an iPhone is overkill in terms of power.

Just because they apparently use the same chip doesn’t erode their specialty. One prime example would be thermal constraints of iPhone. Believe it or not, users can stacks processes in macOS fairly easily, but not the case on iOS. All of those processes will use up some system resources and help generate more heat.

Back in 6502 days, while Commodore 64 uses the same 6502 chips as Apple II, they do different things and excel at different areas. Same thing applies here, with the only exception being all of those devices are designed by Apple.

 

[aj_niner]

I've always wondered why the iPhone can't be the single "chip" that runs everything. In short, while my phone is plugged in, why not have it be my MacOS-like device? BT a keyboard, mouse, and plug in an HDMI, and that thing could be faster than many computers.

Are we any closer to a convergence of devices, or are we continuing to split them?

macOS on iPhone has been a dream of mine for a decade already.

Apple aint gonna do that as it would mean less products sold & cost savings for the customer.

Apple wants you to buy an iPhone, iPad, Mac laptop, Mac desktops, Watch, Homepod, VR headset, Apple TV+, Apple TV, Apple Music, etc etc... then replace them every 4-6 years even when they're perfectly functional for 14-16 years.

What we both want will result in Apple going from a $3 trillion company to a $300 billion company.

 

[Jack Neill]

I've always wondered why the iPhone can't be the single "chip" that runs everything. In short, while my phone is plugged in, why not have it be my MacOS-like device? BT a keyboard, mouse, and plug in an HDMI, and that thing could be faster than many computers.

Are we any closer to a convergence of devices, or are we continuing to split them?

I know it won't happen but a logic boardless MacBook with a slot to plug in the iPhone would be an awesome device. I would totally buy one. Very Dex like but not crappy.

 

[aj_niner]

I know it won't happen but a logic boardless MacBook with a slot to plug in the iPhone would be an awesome device. I would totally buy one. Very Dex like but not crappy.

Samsung was incentivized to make Dex because they are not a significant PC OEM.

They likely annually sold far less laptops & desktops worldwide than Apple at a lower price point & profit margin.

Samsung would gain market share than lose it if Dex was an overwhelming success at Windows' expense.

Now, if Apple pushed macOS on iPad then expect iPads eating into Mac laptop sales. It may even mean far less Mac desktop sales as well.

For almost everyone not using MR or a creative the iPhone or base Mac chips are good enough for daily tasks.

If Intel Mac users have no intention to replace until it falls apart then they'll get overwhelmed by how powerful Apple Silicon chips are.

 

[aj_niner]

Chips have gotten so powerful that even a low powered Amazon Firestick, that was used by the GTA VI hacker, was able to steal the GTA VI trailer days before its scheduled launch.

 

[eyoungren]

I know it won't happen but a logic boardless MacBook with a slot to plug in the iPhone would be an awesome device. I would totally buy one. Very Dex like but not crappy.

I work for a business that furnishes me with a MacBook Pro for my job and not a desktop Mac. That allows me to work from home and has for the last two years. I was not with the company when they transitioned from desktops in 2015 to laptops, but I did inherit the previous MBP when I was hired in 2019. In the middle of this year (2023) the business bought new M2 MacBook Pros.

So, not only would my bosses have to provide me with this boardless MacBook, they'd also have to furnish an iPhone. No idea whether the ram would be provided by the iPhone or the 'boardless' Mac, but right now I have 24GB of ram. I'm a graphic designer and I need that. Maybe this might work for you, but considering my bosses bought the gimped 13" M2 MBP for all the designers instead of the 15", I'm sure they're not going to want to buy something like a dock AND an iPhone.

And there is zero reason for my company to issue any of it's employees cellphones, let alone an iPhone. Oh…and I am most certainly NOT using MY iPhone for that!

 

[Audentia]

I don't understand this forum.
Is anyone here a software engineer? hardware engineer? UX designer? There are a lot complications in all those fields for what the OP is suggesting with a convergence pocket device and just "having the OS adapt as needed" is a lot more complicated than it sounds.
It's not that its impossible, but I doubt its actually desirable (there would be huge tradeoffs with power, heat, cost.) and in addition I'd love to hear more informed comments rather than vague "apple doesn't want to cannibalize their products" arguments.

Furthermore, the obvious convergence device is the Vision Pro. That is the future, it will cannibalize many existing devices eventually.

 

[aj_niner]

I don't understand this forum.
Is anyone here a software engineer? hardware engineer? UX designer? There are a lot complications in all those fields for what the OP is suggesting with a convergence pocket device and just "having the OS adapt as needed" is a lot more complicated than it sounds.
It's not that its impossible, but I doubt its actually desirable (there would be huge tradeoffs with power, heat, cost.) and in addition I'd love to hear more informed comments rather than vague "apple doesn't want to cannibalize their products" arguments.

Furthermore, the obvious convergence device is the Vision Pro. That is the future, it will cannibalize many existing devices eventually.

Ultimately it's a business and shareholder's value matters.

 

[Alex Cai]

Then nobody will buy Macs and iPads from Tim Cook and that's sad for him

 

[aj_niner]

Then nobody will buy Macs and iPads from Tim Cook and that's sad for him

What I would like to see is a Mac mini based on an iPhone chip with a non-EDU MSRP of $199-399.

Or macOS on Apple TV 4K.

 

[leifp]

What I would like to see is a Mac mini based on an iPhone chip with a non-EDU MSRP of $199-399.

Or macOS on Apple TV 4K.

Perhaps you could make good use of a Raspberry Pi or similar? I wouldn’t hold my breath on finding a non-hacked version of macOS running on any hardware inferior to their own M silicon and certainly not in a price-class that is unlikely to offer a return on investment for macOS itself.

 

[aj_niner]

Perhaps you could make good use of a Raspberry Pi or similar? I wouldn’t hold my breath on finding a non-hacked version of macOS running on any hardware inferior to their own M silicon and certainly not in a price-class that is unlikely to offer a return on investment for macOS itself.

Or I could do Windows... it sounds like non-consumer.

 

[Audentia]

Ultimately it's a business and shareholder's value matters.

Not really. That's not the only driving force here.

You and many on this thread seem to assume Apple are wizards, who can just build whatever they want and its purely profit motives (shareholder value) that limit them from building what you want them to make. If this were true, Apple software would never have bugs, as that only hurts shareholder value by decreasing customer satisfaction, but obviously thats not true.

All technical businesses, and especially Apple, have to consider product decisions through 3 main lenses:
Is it feasible? (can it technically be built etc. engineering)
Is it desirable? (do people want it, will they use it, buy it, etc. design)
Is it viable? (does it make money, create shareholder value etc., business)

Let's look at some examples

Airpower - it doesn't matter how many people they think will want it or how much shareholder value they think it will create, it was just not technically feasible.

Touch screens on Macs and macOS - this is a well known design decision. Apple leadership doesn't think it will actually be desirable, so they chose not to pursue the technical challenges even though they could be overcome and it might even help them sell more macs. You may disagree, but especially in the Windows 8 era looking at the lackluster competition, it seems they were correct and its actually not something people want and doesn't actually make the product more desirable. It turns out a really good laptop and a really good tablet are actually better than a 2 in 1.

RCS for iMessage - this is a business (and regulatory) issue. In this case, while its still a lot of effort, its known that Apple could solve this but chose not to for profit and other business motivations until regulatory bodies have now forced them to change, and so now they are and will implement a solution considering the other factors as well.

The idea of an iPhone being a "do everything" pocket device or dockable computer is much more like Airpower or touch screen macs, it's not like RCS iMessage.

There are significant technical and usability issues with this idea, (which is why the samsung Dex has not gained any kind of popularity btw) but yourself and many on this thread seem ignorant and convinced otherwise.

Its possible this could change in the future with advancing technology making the idea more feasible with less tradeoffs so therefore also more desirable. However, I don't think that will happen for many reasons, especially since our computing needs change over time and so it's a moving target.

And this would be an interesting conversation, but just repeating, "it's because apple wants to sell more stuff" is pretty ignorant and boring. I'll leave it at that.

 

[aj_niner]

Not really. That's not the only driving force here.

You and many on this thread seem to assume Apple are wizards, who can just build whatever they want and its purely profit motives (shareholder value) that limit them from building what you want them to make. If this were true, Apple software would never have bugs, as that only hurts shareholder value by decreasing customer satisfaction, but obviously thats not true.

All technical businesses, and especially Apple, have to consider product decisions through 3 main lenses:
Is it feasible? (can it technically be built etc. engineering)
Is it desirable? (do people want it, will they use it, buy it, etc. design)
Is it viable? (does it make money, create shareholder value etc., business)

Let's look at some examples

Airpower - it doesn't matter how many people they think will want it or how much shareholder value they think it will create, it was just not technically feasible.

Touch screens on Macs and macOS - this is a well known design decision. Apple leadership doesn't think it will actually be desirable, so they chose not to pursue the technical challenges even though they could be overcome and it might even help them sell more macs. You may disagree, but especially in the Windows 8 era looking at the lackluster competition, it seems they were correct and its actually not something people want and doesn't actually make the product more desirable. It turns out a really good laptop and a really good tablet are actually better than a 2 in 1.

RCS for iMessage - this is a business (and regulatory) issue. In this case, while its still a lot of effort, its known that Apple could solve this but chose not to for profit and other business motivations until regulatory bodies have now forced them to change, and so now they are and will implement a solution considering the other factors as well.

The idea of an iPhone being a "do everything" pocket device or dockable computer is much more like Airpower or touch screen macs, it's not like RCS iMessage.

There are significant technical and usability issues with this idea, (which is why the samsung Dex has not gained any kind of popularity btw) but yourself and many on this thread seem ignorant and convinced otherwise.

Its possible this could change in the future with advancing technology making the idea more feasible with less tradeoffs so therefore also more desirable. However, I don't think that will happen for many reasons, especially since our computing needs change over time and so it's a moving target.

And this would be an interesting conversation, but just repeating, "it's because apple wants to sell more stuff" is pretty ignorant and boring. I'll leave it at that.

TL;DR: Ultimately it's a business and shareholder's value matters.

 

[Wizec]

If they added another power bus, it absolutely would be a good desktop for many people.

In other words, right now, it always runs off the battery. It can power the electronics and charge the battery at the same time, however, as I understand it, you cannot plug it into power and power the electronics solely off of the external power, as you can with something like a laptop, where you can remove the battery and still use it when it is plugged into power.

Because it doesn't have a power bus to the electronics from external power, it would always be cycling the battery. Using it all day as a desktop would likely wear the battery out much faster than the average consumer would appreciate.

 

[AlexESP]

TL;DR: Ultimately it's a business and shareholder's value matters.

But I think the point here is that if you don’t create great products people want to buy at high price tags, shareholders are not going to be happy. You cannot disassociate both facts. I think it’s ridiculous to imagine Apple employees are thinking about shareholders when creating products; losing them would be just a consequence of creating bad products.

 

[aj_niner]

But I think the point here is that if you don’t create great products people want to buy at high price tags, shareholders are not going to be happy. You cannot disassociate both facts. I think it’s ridiculous to imagine Apple employees are thinking about shareholders when creating products; losing them would be just a consequence of creating bad products.

Has Apple failed in that regard significantly since Jobs' time?

It is one thing for a MUG to yearn about the good ol days but different that more than 100 million Mac users worldwide are sticking to the platform.

As it is the Mac leads in tech node, architecture, pricing, battery life, waste heat, build quality, etc.

It could improve in terms of right of repair but that does not prevent people from buying it in droves.

 

[Audentia]

If they added another power bus, it absolutely would be a good desktop for many people.

In other words, right now, it always runs off the battery. It can power the electronics and charge the battery at the same time, however, as I understand it, you cannot plug it into power and power the electronics solely off of the external power, as you can with something like a laptop, where you can remove the battery and still use it when it is plugged into power.

Because it doesn't have a power bus to the electronics from external power, it would always be cycling the battery. Using it all day as a desktop would likely wear the battery out much faster than the average consumer would appreciate.

Right, I think with limited space though they don't want to add that, although I'm not sure on the details.

Another issue is heat. Have you ever played a game on iPhone while its plugged in? It gets super hot, i don't think that would be great for the device hours on end if it were a desktop. I think you need at least the space of the iPad to dissipate heat better without some other breakthrough.

 

[Audentia]

But I think the point here is that if you don’t create great products people want to buy at high price tags, shareholders are not going to be happy. You cannot disassociate both facts. I think it’s ridiculous to imagine Apple employees are thinking about shareholders when creating products; losing them would be just a consequence of creating bad products.

exactly

 

[Wizec]

Right, I think with limited space though they don't want to add that, although I'm not sure on the details.

Another issue is heat. Have you ever played a game on iPhone while its plugged in? It gets super hot, i don't think that would be great for the device hours on end if it were a desktop. I think you need at least the space of the iPad to dissipate heat better without some other breakthrough.

That’s a really good point. The horsepower is there, but not a good enough cooling solution. Perhaps some creative docks with giant heatsinks and fans would help 😆

 

[Jay Tee]

I've always wondered why the iPhone can't be the single "chip" that runs everything. In short, while my phone is plugged in, why not have it be my MacOS-like device? BT a keyboard, mouse, and plug in an HDMI, and that thing could be faster than many computers.

Are we any closer to a convergence of devices, or are we continuing to split them?

These devices have now become critical to our lives. As a result, you'll want redundancy rather than a single point-of-failure.

There is value in what you say, but that's far into the future: perhaps something like an Apple Watch coupled with a powerful Siri that

• authenticates you
• serves as a personal assistant that executes your every command.