Apple Explains Why iPad Multitasking Took So Long to Arrive

[Hornby]

My opinion is that Apple didn't want the iPad to cannibalize Mac sales, but they realized that they have pushed customers' patience about as far as they could, so they finally relented.

Now the iPad still does not fully replace the Mac for many people, but the new multitasking helps a lot. Eventually, they will have to find a different way to make people buy both the iPad and Mac other than to cripple the iPad.

I’m with you on this. iPad OS was reaching a point where its minor upgrades each year must have been putting downward pressure on sales to the point that it was hurting.

I am able to go iPad for 95% but the update definitely will make it 100% for me. I’m thrilled at these changes this year.

 

[Steve121178]

It took so long as they never needed to revive iPad sales as they've never been in this kind of slump before.

Not buying the "weren't powerful" enough excuse. The M1 was plenty powerful enough!

 

[klasma]

There's nothing wrong with this. It is a fair argument, especially on the 11" model, there is NO USE for multiple windows, but on an external monitor it is a godsend. Now open up dual monitor support and it will be the end of the MacBook Air.

They are removing Slide Over and Split View, which are useful in handheld use. That doesn’t make sense. There was room for improvements for sure, but the new windowing isn't that, for handheld use. Many users will disagree with you that there is no use for showing more than one app at once in handheld mode.

 

[tobybrut]

It was missing virtual memory, so the expectation of being able to run an unlimited number of programs similarly to a desktop experience, was impossible. Of course that was a decision of their own making, but it still takes time to undo such low level expectations, especially when you work at Apple's scale.

AFAIK the M1 series iPad Pro and later (so basically everything able to run stage manager) can support virtual RAM, which is why they are able to make it work, when they couldn't before. Or maybe they were able to enable virtual ram for all devices, I'm not sure.

But there were in fact reasons... of a sort.

This is the best comment of the thread so far. Non-engineers insult Federighi as some liar who was just trying to justify not doing what you wanted him to do. The A-series chips were designed for phones where people never ran more than one app at a time. All the way up to the M1 iPad Pro, iPads ran those phone chips. Non-engineers do not think about virtual memory and what it does. It’s ubiquitous for desktop OS’es that virtual memory is used, but phones don’t need it.

For those who don’t know what virtual memory is, it’s a way for the OS to swap apps or processes in and out of memory so that the amount of memory looks a lot bigger than it actually is, which allows many apps to run at the same time. Non-active memory is stored on the hard drive/SSD. The system would then swap processes in and out of real memory, reading the swap file on the drive and moving that into active memory while storing the swapped out process onto the drive. It happens so fast that a person can’t tell the apps aren’t actually running at the same time. Without virtual memory, this can’t be easily done and have it perform up to the instantaneous expections of iPadOS because you’re limited to only RAM.

A lot of older iPads had 4-6GB of RAM, a pathetic amount for a desktop OS but more than enough for single-tasking OS’es. Without virtual memory, it was impossible to run multiple apps simultaneously and have them actually not lag like crazy. With virtual memory now enabled by M-series processors, multiple apps are suddenly possible. They somehow got Stage Manager to work on a 2018 iPad Pro, but it had its limitations since they didn’t have true virtual memory. They probably implemented a virtual memory controller completely in software. The speed of the drive also matters with regards to virtual memory. A slow 400Mbps drive probably doesn’t work so well compared to a lightning fast SSD running at 2Gbps or faster.

With the oldest chip in the lineup at an A16, their software-based virtual memory controller probably finally performs fast enough to implement the full windowing system across the lineup. Even then there are still limitations of 4-12 apps at once depending on processor.

I’ve seen many people say the hardware is the same as a MacBook, so why can’t it run like macOS and allow unlimited processes? The easy answer is battery. Even the biggest iPad battery is still small compared to the smallest Mac battery. I’ve run the same tasks on my iPad and on my MacBook Pro over the same time period and see dramatic differences. While my iPad will still have 70% battery life after a couple hours of hard use, my MacBook Pro will be down to 20% or less. And this is with a smaller battery by far. That’s because iPadOS was written from the ground up for preserving battery life while macOS isn’t. Allow unlimited processes on an iPad, including background processes, and that 70% becomes 0% compared to the MacBook Pro.

Apple continues to preserve battery life by putting limitations on how things perform on an iPad while loosening up these limitations on the Macs with bigger batteries. Imagine if you could put iPadOS on a 16” MacBook Pro. That machine would probably run for a 1-2 days continuously instead of the 7-10 hours you would normally expect. This is a reason Apple requires apps to request background processes rather than doing it automatically for all processes. That means apps like Final Cut Pro still can’t do background rendering until it’s updated to do so. I am curious if a background process could include audio output to create multiple audio playing at the same time. Having not looked at the new APIs, I don’t know. I tested the Music app, which plays in the background just fine with another app in the forefront, but the audio still cuts off if I play sound on a different app in the foreground. Either it’s still not allowed or Apple didn’t update Music to do it.

 

[dalestrauss]

I tried it on my 11” iPad Pro but reverted back to full screen experience because I find windows experience pointless on this screen size. I don’t see myself getting the larger iPad because I already have MacBook Pro as a larger screen. And if I wanted a lighter device I would rather get MacBook Air instead. So I’m personally still struggling to find a reason for having the larger iPad to use the new multitasking experience.

I agree with Alex Lindsay on MacBreak Weekly - we are about two years out from the 13" iPad Pro replacing the MacBook Air, except for hard core laptop only users.

 

[kiv.atso]

I agree with Alex Lindsay on MacBreak Weekly - we are about two years out from the 13" iPad Pro replacing the MacBook Air, except for hard core laptop only users.

Looking forward to try it out when it’s ready for that

 

[tobybrut]

They are removing Slide Over and Split View, which are useful in handheld use. That doesn’t make sense. There was room for improvements for sure, but the new windowing isn't that, for handheld use. Many users will disagree with you that there is no use for showing more than one app at once in handheld mode.

I wish Apple didn’t have single app mode, but rather a mode with the exact same multitasking features as in iPadOS 18. Then we’d still have Slide Over, Split View, and those three dots on the top center that let you switch between different instances of the same app, like I always use for Safari. Switching between Safari instances is now a lot harder and can only be done in Windowing mode without going into Expose and swiping left until you find the right instance. You have to pull down the menu bar, go to Windows menu, and choose the Safari instance. Apple made a lot of things harder in some cases.

 

[hagjohn]

"The delay apparently stemmed from early hardware limitations. According to Federighi, original iPads lacked the power for true multitasking"

If you're talking pre M silicon days, then yes I could understand that statement. But we are now up to M4 chips in ipads. So it cannot be a hardware limitation for the last 3 to 4 years then? To me it was more a software or operating system limitation.

Also unless I'm missing a point here. Is he really trying to tell us that ipadOS was not a multi threaded capable operating system in the first place?

His excuse doesn't hold water. At any point in time, they could have done this with the right hardware configuration.

 

[hovscorpion12]

It seems to me they still haven't figured out multitasking and multiwindowing for a touch UI. The new windowing is probably fine for use with a pointing device and larger external monitor, but it doesn’t strike me as particularly ergonomic for handheld use, compared to approaches like Slide Over and Split View.

I recommend watching 9to5's 2 videos.

I do have OS 26 on an iPad Mini 7 and multitasking on the 8" display is very fun.

 

[Siliconguy]

A lot of older iPads had 4-6GB of RAM

My A13 equipped ninth generation iPad has 3 GB of RAM. It will be interesting to see what it does with iPadOS 19.

Two windows tiled in landscape mode would be handy for many things. Editing in one window and using the calculator in the other for one example.

Separate windows for file management will be a big improvement. Finally the iPad will match the capabilities of an Apple IIGS.

 

[nsklaus]

it took so long to deliver because apple is stubborn, like always.
and since steve jobs era ended apple became also clueless. so yes, stubborn and clueless.

the whole process of features release is broken ,
the whole interaction between apple and its user base is broken.

normaly it's easy: as a software company, you have an idea that you want to implement in your product, you introduce it as an optional setting, you monitor public reaction toward it, you make sure it works well and it is fully implemented, and if a majority of users like it, you finally make it default.
("step by step" approach).

but at apple, it's different: they release half-cooked, badly implemented project, with lots of bugs and problems, they make it mandatory, no options, user base is treated like guinea pigs, and even when everything end up as a disaster they take *years* to reluctantly fix the situation, and they manage to do it in a sub-optimal way even.
("clueless drunken bull in a china shop" approach ).

 

[drewcosten]

Also.

I’m still not buying an iPad until they add multiuser logins.

If unix in the early 1970s could do this im sure the iPad could.

It’s an iPad, not a wePad.

Yes, I’m joking, but that probably is what Apple is thinking.

That said, I suspect it will have multiuser support one day, many years from now (especially since it is possible for iPads in schools, from what I understand). They need something new to announce for iPadOS 29, after all. 😄

 

[turbineseaplane]

I don’t think this is going to meaningfully change iPad sales or interest at all.

 

[Schwarzmaler20]

Not convinced here. If hardware limits would have been an issue we would not have seen overlapping windows in OS X 10.2 on a Powerbook.

 

[hovscorpion12]

Lets all just agree that we got what we've been asking for. September is going to be a great month. I look forward to seeing what 2026 looks. I imagine the top devs will have their apps updated day 1. Others may take a while.

I fully expect iPad sales to jump 400% come September. Over 1,000% leap by mid-2026.

 

[tobybrut]

Not convinced here. If hardware limits would have been an issue we would not have seen overlapping windows in OS X 10.2 on a Powerbook.

Virtual memory has existed on desktop OS’es for decades, so CPU’s intended for desktop OS’es were designed with hardware-based virtual memory controllers. For years, and some still today, iPads ran iPhone chips which had no virtual memory controllers. Why build in hardware when the phone doesn’t use it? Only with the M-series of chips did Apple finally have hardware-based virtual memory controllers since the M-series were designed with macOS in mind. I don’t include Intel chips that have virtual memory controllers, but Intel CPU’s have never been inside iPads. That meant Stage Manager was only available on those M-series chips with its full capabilities, though Apple probably wrote a software-based controller to make it work on the 2018 iPad Pro that had only half the abilities as the M-series versions. Software-based functions are often hundreds of times, and sometimes thousands of times slower than hardware implementations.

To an engineer, Federighi’s explanation makes perfect sense. Non-engineers may struggle to understand this, but a software or hardware engineer would know instantly what he meant.

 

[tobybrut]

Lets all just agree that we got what we've been asking for. September is going to be a great month. I look forward to seeing what 2026 looks. I imagine the top devs will have their apps updated day 1. Others may take a while.

I fully expect iPad sales to jump 400% come September. Over 1,000% leap by mid-2026.

Highly unlikely. If anything iPad sales will drop. There just aren’t that many enthusiasts looking for these new multitasking features. Normies just don’t care about the new stuff and never run more than one or two apps at a time. The loss of multitasking simplicity on the iPad may end up costing sales among normies while boosting sales among tech enthusiasts. But since normies vastly outnumber enthusiasts, sales could actually suffer.

Don’t take MacRumors or any other tech forum as representative of the population at large.

 

[mlayer]

it took so long to deliver because apple is stubborn, like always.
and since steve jobs era ended apple became also clueless. so yes, stubborn and clueless.

the whole process of features release is broken ,
the whole interaction between apple and its user base is broken.

normaly it's easy: as a software company, you have an idea that you want to implement in your product, you introduce it as an optional setting, you monitor public reaction toward it, you make sure it works well and it is fully implemented, and if a majority of users like it, you finally make it default.
("step by step" approach).

but at apple, it's different: they release half-cooked, badly implemented project, with lots of bugs and problems, they make it mandatory, no options, user base is treated like guinea pigs, and even when everything end up as a disaster they take *years* to reluctantly fix the situation, and they manage to do it in a sub-optimal way even.
("clueless drunken bull in a china shop" approach ).

This is so short-sighted. Apple has multiple audiences and use cases for the iPad. That’s why 26 has the option screen at the beginning for the user to choose full screen or windowed, to set expectations. It may not be to your liking, but that’s what the beta is for. When they get to general release there will still be a percentage of dissatisfied users. Can’t please all the people all the time.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

With each passing iPad OS release it becomes more and more ridiculous to maintain the artificial wall between it and the Mac. Eventually they will be functionally identical. defeature the base A series iPad OS if you want but any M series iPad is perfectly capable of running most any standard Mac app....

Maybe they are technically capable, but the iPad has several restrictions that keep it from being able to utilize its hardware at the same level as a Mac.
The biggest and most obvious being that it has about half the thermal envelope of a MacBook Air. The second being that it has about half the battery capacity of a MacBook Air, but is still expecting to get similar battery life.
The fact that with iPadOS, it allows the iPad to have similar performance and battery life to a MacBook Air and a significantly smaller design is quite impressive, and a lot of that is because of the way that iPadOS managers things like RAM completely differently from macOS.
macOS can, and will, constantly use as much RAM as it wants. Even just browsing around can easily take GBs away.
The iPad doesn’t exactly work the same way.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Not enough power? The M1 from almost 5 years ago was the most powerful chip of it's kind! At the same time, Windows 10 and 11 run smoothly on a lowly Intel i3 chip in a system with 4GB RAM. So with the most powerful chip of it's kind, Apple couldn't make things work smoothly?

 

[johnrlaporta]

What kind of explanation is: "We couldn't do it, because we made it impossible for ourselves?"

Obviously if you skimp on RAM, you can't do proper multitasking. The first iPad came with 512MB of RAM - in 2010, at a time when 16GB was becoming industry-standard.

Amazing how it was possible with 512k of RAM with MultiFinder, isn’t it?

 

[rjjacobson]

I disagree… I am on an iPad Pro M4, and I use Stage Manager. I tried Windowed Apps, but like SM substantially more. SM is more predictable and faster, and WA is a mess IMO.

Same for me. When it was installed the beta on my M4 iPad Pro defaulted to this choice and I found I liked the increased options it allowed and it just seemed to work well. I going to keep using in that mode

 

[Darth Tulhu]

I won't presume to understand (or believe) the reasons why the iPad was limited the way it was for so long.

At this point I don't care.

I enjoyed the iPad greatly for what it is/was and now it looks like I will enjoy my existing one (!) even more.

As long as it continues, as Craig puts it, to "still meet the iPad's basic contract".

Apple is basically making a wish I made many posts ago to come true: Don't just shoehorn macOS onto the iPad, just give the iPad more Mac capabilities.

Looks like that is EXACTLY what they are doing.

I can't wait.

 

[breenmask]

Nobody needs these multitasking features.

Terrible iPadOS update.

 

[rjjacobson]

I tried it on my 11” iPad Pro but reverted back to full screen experience because I find windows experience pointless on this screen size. I don’t see myself getting the larger iPad because I already have MacBook Pro as a larger screen. And if I wanted a lighter device I would rather get MacBook Air instead. So I’m personally still struggling to find a reason for having the larger iPad to use the new multitasking experience.

In my case I already had the 13 inch M4 iPad Pro that I use probably for 60 percent of daily use (I am at home retired doing some emeritus geology and Paleontolgy work for the university). My 15 PM is probably 20 percent when away form home and my M2 16 inch MacBook Pro is for times when I have to run the full excel spreadsheet with my budget (could not get it to work with the limited 365 on iPad Pro), a checkbook manager program I like, backups for my iPad and iPhone (besides auto daily iCloud backups of course), an important cataloging program i use (Recollector ) for my 1200 specimen trilobite collection (now 75 percent housed at the Center for Paleontology at the University that I am emeritus curator at). The cataloging program is read only on iPad and iPhone so I have to do data entry on the MacBook.