iPad Marketing VP: iPad and Mac are Complementary Devices, Not Competing Devices

[H_D]

The iPad already is a kind of hybrid solution. Some Apps work better touch-based, others despite all attempts feel much better with the MK and maybe a mouse (and then the touch- asked interface rrrrreeally starts to suck). Fine controls are better with a mouse, writing is better with a keyboard, retouching would be cool with the pencil, XY-modulation in Logic is really fun with touch. And so on.
The ability to have a dualOS iPad for use with keyboard or with touch first is not as nuts as some people think but only would make a duality already established by adding a keyboard and turning the Pad into an almost-notebook. Allowing MacOS on the 13 / 1TB would make this a very nice sub-MBA-device. And it would not cannibalize any sales. The iPad is so expensive that the MBA would still sell … better performance for less money. And the pro crowd would use the iPad but still also want a MBP for more heavy workloads.

It’s just giving people options and enriching the ecosphere.

I mean, I have two iPads, an iPhone, a MBP and a Studio - and I use all of them daily. But the iPad suffers from not being able to close the gap between iPhone and Desktop.

 

[Bubble99]

The iPad already is a kind of hybrid solution. Some Apps work better touch-based, others despite all attempts feel much better with the MK and maybe a mouse (and then the touch- asked interface rrrrreeally starts to suck). Fine controls are better with a mouse, writing is better with a keyboard, retouching would be cool with the pencil, XY-modulation in Logic is really fun with touch. And so on.
The ability to have a dualOS iPad for use with keyboard or with touch first is not as nuts as some people think but only would make a duality already established by adding a keyboard and turning the Pad into an almost-notebook. Allowing MacOS on the 13 / 1TB would make this a very nice sub-MBA-device. And it would not cannibalize any sales. The iPad is so expensive that the MBA would still sell … better performance for less money. And the pro crowd would use the iPad but still also want a MBP for more heavy workloads.

It’s just giving people options and enriching the ecosphere.

I mean, I have two iPads, an iPhone, a MBP and a Studio - and I use all of them daily. But the iPad suffers from not being able to close the gap between iPhone and Desktop.

I see if any thing Apple having some thing similar to samsung dex before porting MacOS over that would confuse people.

 

[throAU]

While I advocate for background processing limits being lifted I don’t think they should be entirely removed. The battery life on iPad is largely thanks to the way it limits background processes considering just how much smaller the batteries in iPad are vs the mac. Allowing unconstrained processing would likely lead to far shorter battery life if people tried to use their iPads the way they do their macs. This isn’t a fault of the iPad, this is a fault in the reasoning of those calling for macOS on iPad. The iPad and iPadOS are designed with each others limitations in mind. If Apple had macOS in mind when designing the iPad they would probably have tried to increase the capacity of the battery to match the MacBook Air.

Sure, and I agree, that's sensible.

How about limit background processing when on battery. Like the Mac already does... and already has a switch for within that platform ("low power mode only on battery" for example).

What I'm advocating for is a more complete experience when plugged into AC power (or a dock) on a desk. But hey, let me flick the switch to have it run normal background stuff on battery if I want it to. Maybe make that bound to "high performance" mode like the larger MacBook pros already have.

 

[raindogg]

That would serve to simply deny people the ability to pick from different feature ranges and prices, and reduce Apple's revenue.

Maybe...

 

[Apleeseed84]

If I were to guess, it’s probably due to Qualcomm’s licensing terms that Apple fought in court for years and lost. Unlike most suppliers, Qualcomm demands royalties based on the percentage of the cost of the entire device, not just for what they supply. That means the more expensive an item is, the more the license holder has to pay Qualcomm even if the chips are the same. MacBooks are expensive beasts, so if Apple put a modem in a laptop, they’d have to pay Qualcomm a ton of money, not just for the modem but a percentage of the cost of the Mac. Say someone did spend $7000 on a completely maxed out M3 Max MBP. Qualcomm would get a much bigger haul than they’d get from a consumer buying a base MBA.

Since most Mac owners have iPhones, or at least a modern phone, those owners likely have access to tethering. I suspect that’s their solution. iPads tend to be cheaper, so Qualcomm gets less on average than if cellular modems are put on MacBooks. If Apple’s own cellular modem efforts ever pay off, I’d guess cellular would come to MacBooks.

What hurts this even more is that cellphone carriers can “finance” us expensive iPads for 36 months, but yet financing a MacBook is literally impossible when within the same price point. The disconnect between technologies is monumental I think.

 

[eno12]

What hurts this even more is that cellphone carriers can “finance” us expensive iPads for 36 months, but yet financing a MacBook is literally impossible when within the same price point. The disconnect between technologies is monumental I think.

Eh? News to me. I financed my M3 Max MBP from Apple with 12 months no interest. It is not 36 months but helped spread out the cost a bit. Would be nice if they would do 24 months like they do for the iPhone.

Financing and Credit

Get special financing on Apple products. Pay over time, interest-free with Apple Card Monthly Installments. And get 3% Daily Cash back with Apple Card.

www.apple.com

 

[Bubble99]

Maybe...

Not sure how that chart helps when people are complaining that iPadOS is lacking in features and when you ask them how it is lacking they do not reply?

 

[wbeasley]

What hurts this even more is that cellphone carriers can “finance” us expensive iPads for 36 months, but yet financing a MacBook is literally impossible when within the same price point. The disconnect between technologies is monumental I think.

not really.

Cell phone carriers finance CELL versions of iPads. Not wifi ones. Well none I've seen.

So laptops without SIM cards arent going to capture them a contract.

Buy laptop through a low or no interest scheme instead...

 

[Bubble99]

BIG NEWS!! MacOS GUI DESIGN iPadOS For iPad Pro!​

 

[AppleFeller]

I get the complimentary perspective and I hear side car is awesome too. That said people who prefer to have the iPad be their computer shouldn’t be shamed into the current limitations of iPadOS with the solution to buy a Mac just because the apps on iPad are inherently limited being derived off iOS system designs and limits.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

BIG NEWS!! MacOS GUI DESIGN iPadOS For iPad Pro!​

Almost guaranteed to be clickbait. I mean, if someone wanted to get a lot of views and have people copy their video link everywhere, that’s precisely the image they’d want to use.

 

[Bubble99]

I get the complimentary perspective and I hear side car is awesome too. That said people who prefer to have the iPad be their computer shouldn’t be shamed into the current limitations of iPadOS with the solution to buy a Mac just because the apps on iPad are inherently limited being derived off iOS system designs and limits.

I’m almost tired of typing it was ask for billion time why so many YouTube tech creators are saying why they feel iPadOS is holding back and not true OS.

 

[Thehangmn]

I still bought multiple Macs. I have three of them in my den, two laptops and one desktop. That’s the thing. None of the three types, iPad, laptop, and desktop, can ever fully replace the others because each has strengths and weaknesses. Even though my iPad can do everything I need it to do, I still have multiple laptops and desktops.

Why, you ask? The desktop is an M2 Ultra. You can’t put an Ultra in a laptop or a tablet, so that automatically means if you want ultimate power, you get a desktop. But a desktop is stuck at your desk, so you need a laptop. My laptops are an M1 Pro and an M3 Max MBP’s. I use them in different situations, but the major thing is that they are good for travel. You can’t take your desktop with you unless you’re MKBHD who took his iMac Pro in his luggage.

Then there’s the iPad. My current is an M1 2021 version with an M4 iPad Pro arriving Wednesday. The iPad is my bread and butter able to travel everywhere with me within my house. It’s so much easier to walk around with an iPad than with a MBP.

Even when they can all do everything I need, the difference is the level of convenience, so I have all three types. To me, it’s the form factor, not so much the software features, that makes the biggest difference. If I couldn’t afford to have that many devices, I’d forgo the desktop and the laptops and just buy an iPad.

If my iPad were a Mac, I’d still buy a Mac because an iPad can never be powerful enough for certain tasks due to an iPad’s limited battery and thermals. Fortunately the iPad is not a Mac because I love it as a tablet. I love apps that are optimized for touch, which makes the iPad far more enjoyable to use than any Mac app, which is a big reason why I don’t want the iPad to become a Mac.

You’re in the minority. Most people can’t afford to buy $7000 worth of Apple products. So if the iPad were a Mac, they would likely start there and not bother with the more costly laptop.

 

[tobybrut]

You’re in the minority. Most people can’t afford to buy $7000 worth of Apple products. So if the iPad were a Mac, they would likely start there and not bother with the more costly laptop.

I think you missed the point I was making, which is to illustrate the unique spot each type of device holds. All three types of devices are different and are good for different things. Just about everyone in this forum is in the minority since most people do not want the iPad to become a Mac. There is no reason to make the iPad a Mac because then we’d lose the iPad as a unique device. The vast majority do not hang out in Mac forums claiming they want macOS on their iPad. No, they go about their lives using their iPad for just about everything and don’t need a Mac since iPads really can do most of what Macs can do without macOS. Just as Macs can do most of what iPads can do (I would say 90% overlap between the two) but are less convenient. An iPad running macOS still cannot do everything a Mac can do due to its physical characteristics, hence the need for multiple tiers of devices. Why sell desktops at all, then, if macOS is the magic bullet for all things computing? Hint it’s not. People buy iPads, not because they dream about macOS and being able to run Unix commands on Terminal. They buy iPads because they’re fast, efficient, easy-to-use and uncomplicated and still can do just about everything they need it to do. Easy-to-use and uncomplicated are the key words there. Putting macOS on it is not that.

Most people cannot afford an M2 Ultra, let alone four devices. But as I said, if I were forced to choose one, it’d be the iPad because it is the most convenient of all devices and does everything everyone needs to do with niche exceptions, all without needing macOS. Yet forum denizens and YouTubers seem to want to shoehorn the iPad into a niche that’s already covered by other devices because only their workflows are valid. And even then, I guarantee you that 100% of YouTubers could run ther businesses off of an iPad alone, even the ones that complain the most. I can give you the examples of Fernando Silva and Christopher Lawley who do everything on their iPads and don’t complain. Most YouTubers buy other devices because 1) they can, and 2) it makes SOME things more convenient. Bottom line, you buy what makes sense for you rather than trying to force a square peg into a round hole. macOS is a square peg and the iPad is the round hole. Most of you macOS advocates even acknowledge this, saying things like, “we know the experience isn’t very good” or “we could just turn off touch”.

 

[Bubble99]

I think you missed the point I was making, which is to illustrate the unique spot each type of device holds. All three types of devices are different and are good for different things. Just about everyone in this forum is in the minority since most people do not want the iPad to become a Mac. There is no reason to make the iPad a Mac because then we’d lose the iPad as a unique device. The vast majority do not hang out in Mac forums claiming they want macOS on their iPad. No, they go about their lives using their iPad for just about everything and don’t need a Mac since iPads really can do most of what Macs can do without macOS. Just as Macs can do most of what iPads can do (I would say 90% overlap between the two) but are less convenient. An iPad running macOS still cannot do everything a Mac can do due to its physical characteristics, hence the need for multiple tiers of devices. Why sell desktops at all, then, if macOS is the magic bullet for all things computing? Hint it’s not. People buy iPads, not because they dream about macOS and being able to run Unix commands on Terminal. They buy iPads because they’re fast, efficient, easy-to-use and uncomplicated and still can do just about everything they need it to do. Easy-to-use and uncomplicated are the key words there. Putting macOS on it is not that.

Most people cannot afford an M2 Ultra, let alone four devices. But as I said, if I were forced to choose one, it’d be the iPad because it is the most convenient of all devices and does everything everyone needs to do with niche exceptions, all without needing macOS. Yet forum denizens and YouTubers seem to want to shoehorn the iPad into a niche that’s already covered by other devices because only their workflows are valid. And even then, I guarantee you that 100% of YouTubers could run ther businesses off of an iPad alone, even the ones that complain the most. I can give you the examples of Fernando Silva and Christopher Lawley who do everything on their iPads and don’t complain. Most YouTubers buy other devices because 1) they can, and 2) it makes SOME things more convenient. Bottom line, you buy what makes sense for you rather than trying to force a square peg into a round hole. macOS is a square peg and the iPad is the round hole. Most of you macOS advocates even acknowledge this, saying things like, “we know the experience isn’t very good” or “we could just turn off touch”.

It was explain with iPad pro in docking to the Keyboard and desktop mode with mouse and trackpad and booting up to MacOS running desktop apps that developers will stop making touch app devices for the iPadOS.

 

[wbeasley]

It was explain with iPad pro in docking to the Keyboard and desktop mode with mouse and trackpad and booting up to MacOS running desktop apps that developers will stop making touch app devices for the iPadOS.

The thing is Apple could do exactly this.
On the surface it makes sense: add a keyboard and mouse and give users the option to boot into MacOS or iPadOS.

But I'd also be everyone wanting this would complain loudly when apps ran slower or battery life was two hours because on thin devices thermal load is going to be a real issue. Laptops manage this already. And perform in short bursts quickly before slowing down. Everyone thinks M4 will be super fast. If you lower that expectation, complaints start.

And yes, I know one huge advantage of the M4 is smaller 3nm chip means less power needed.

And if you get MacOS running, there will be complaints "why not enable touch"...

The only thing we can all be sure of is no matter what Apple release, a vocal minority will always be disappointed.

 

[wbeasley]

I get the complimentary perspective and I hear side car is awesome too. That said people who prefer to have the iPad be their computer shouldn’t be shamed into the current limitations of iPadOS with the solution to buy a Mac just because the apps on iPad are inherently limited being derived off iOS system designs and limits.

There's no shame in buying a nice Apple laptop that will give you both the features you need and be portable.

The Mac Air laptops are almost as portable as iPads with a Magic Keyboard.

But people dont want to admit that. They'd rather complain...

Do you really want an iPad that becomes a laptop or a laptop that becomes an iPad?
MacOS isnt designed for touch first interaction. Microsoft havent really made Windows a great touch experience.
You can't get around fingers are fatter and less precise than mouse pointers.
Touch on Windows is good for buttons, less good for most other UI elements.

Hopefully Apple will significantly improve some apps in iPadOS this year.
Fix the clunky Files app to work more like MacOS.
And while few actually need multiple apps sharing a screen, multitasking needs improvement too.

Fix those things and perhaps more people will be happy that both iPads and laptops can coexist tweaked to different working styles without being the same OS.

 

[The Game 161]

Using iOS for productivity sucks horribly.

Aside from people who want to use the pencil for digital art, I can't fathom why anybody would buy the iPad Pro over a Macbook Air.

The 13 inch iPad Pro with 512gb of storage and the keyboard add on is actually more expensive than the M3 MBA 512gb

Because people want iOS apps and a better media content device. The new Magic Keyboard certainly makes the iPad close to the same level of typing experience. Just needs a mac like file system among other areas where mac is successful.

 

[tobybrut]

Because people want iOS apps and a better media content device. The new Magic Keyboard certainly makes the iPad close to the same level of typing experience. Just needs a mac like file system among other areas where mac is successful.

Can’t have a macOS-like file system, at least not visibly. The two OS’es have identical file systems, just one is hidden due to sandboxing. Remember, the major security feature of iPadOS is the inability of any app to affect the storage space of any other app. That precludes the existence of anything like Finder since you cannot move files freely. You might notice this is why the Files app concentrates heavily on cloud and external storage instead of local storage.

The only thing I can possibly see Apple do is to create a generic sandbox that isn’t dedicated to any app, essentially a carve out of space on the iPad where apps are permitted to freely read and write. This creates the illusion of Finder, but isn’t, but is actually rather close to having cloud storage locally. Apple will never open up the file system to openly allow apps to read and write from anywhere or else it compromises the core security of iPadOS. Mac apps can have sandboxing, but it is optional and cannot be enforced universally.

 

[throAU]

Just about everyone in this forum is in the minority since most people do not want the iPad to become a Mac

Thing is, the iPad does not need to "become a Mac" to run Mac apps. The underlying software is much closer than most realise and the hardware on the pro models at least is essentially identical to the MacBook Air.

Now that's there's a 13" iPad available its basically (hardware wise) a MacBook Air with a replaceable keyboard/trackpad, touch support, pencil support, better display and speakers, cellular internet and faceID.

The hardware is more than capable. Unleash it! If people want an iPad only iPad - the lower tier models exist. And running macOS apps as well does not mean you give up anything that already makes the iPad great!

 

[throAU]

Can’t have a macOS-like file system, at least not visibly. The two OS’es have identical file systems, just one is hidden due to sandboxing. Remember, the major security feature of iPadOS is the inability of any app to affect the storage space of any other app. That precludes the existence of anything like Finder since you cannot move files freely. You might notice this is why the Files app concentrates heavily on cloud and external storage instead of local storage.

macOS store apps are also sandboxed.

There exists a mechanism to enable them to access parts of the filesystem without getting access to the core OS files, due to the newer macOS secure partition setup.

The pieces are now there to do this properly. They weren't in the past, when the files app was first provided. If apple was to restrict the iPad Pro to Mac App Store apps only (which include mandatory sandboxing!) that would be sufficient.