ram - 5 apps one stage. 5 stages - 25 apps ?
Somemore , why macos need even one.. at all. useless.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Explains Why Stage Manager is Limited to M1 iPads in New Statement
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Somemore , why macos need even one.. at all. useless.
If im a betting man, after 20 is where support is dropped, 18 and 19 will have very limited features improvements.
Correct. It’s due to people weighing in in the issue and being positional on all sides.
Let people scrutinize. Scrutiny is good.
And people in this thread, keep ingesting Apples excuse and regurgitating it. Apple knows they could not drop 2017 MacBook Pro’s because there are probably more in existence than M1 Macs combined. I suspect many who bought the 2016 MacBook Pro’s immediately got rid of that troubled model and upgraded to 2017 models for some peace of mind.
My excuse is, this is not the end of the world anyway, but Apple could have at least given older iPads a concession like a persistent Dock on screen. That could have been a good trade off.
This is not unusual for a beta. As a software engineer, I put these types of flags for every feature I implemented, mostly for testing purposes for me and for QA. Remember after the fiasco of iOS 14 where its instablity forced a testing change at Apple where they decided to silo all testing? That required QA to isolate features. The way to do that is to turn off other features so a single feature can be tested in isolation.
Just because it's present in the software doesn't mean it's a good idea to turn it on for unsupported hardware. You're likely to see a ton of out of memory errors that pop up every quarter second to the point where you want to throw your iPad out the window.
Those flags exist because it wouldn't require a software update to enable/disable a feature. You can just set a plist entry and turn things on and off. Don't expect those flags to still be there when the software leaves beta.
That is a notion no one knows. Theoretically, iPads from this year should run at least the next 4 iOS iterations. Albeit with reduced feature support.
If 2020 iPads aren't seeing the full iPadOS 16, I am not confident they will get the full version of future OSes either.
This is why the enterprise market is still majority windows and Linux, as they at least have stable and long term support channels (long term meaning more than 10 years and clear software support roadmap, not Apple's arbitrary ~5-years-but-sometimes-we-decided-less).
Next year, the A9 and A10 based ipads would probably be dropped. That leaves the A12 based ipads another 2 years of life from now.
They would get iPadOS 17, but 18 onward is probably up in the air. By then, the A12X is more than 5 years old already, (and the A12Z is just the A12X with an extra core enabled). So won't be surprised those ipads got dropped by iPadOS 18 or 19.
How many people on this forum are software engineers or have a deep understanding of the technical differences between M1 and A series chips?
Seems we have a bunch of talk but nobody presenting evidence it would work well on older iPads. Not sure how a non-M1 iPad could drive a high res external display that essentially gives you a second desktop, instead of just mirroring
Seems we have a bunch of talk but nobody presenting evidence it would work well on older iPads. Not sure how a non-M1 iPad could drive a high res external display that essentially gives you a second desktop, instead of just mirroring
Yup, and the storage speed excuse won't fly either as the ipad is already on desktop class nvme storage, like the Intel Macs. The decision is clearly marketing and financial, to boost sales as this year will be rough with all the shortages and inflation.
This is why I said that if Apple were truly honest about their reason, simply show it to us how bad it would run on the previous gen ipads. Apple should've been testing these ipads running alpha or beta version of the OS. Be transparent, and it will give more weight to the claim. Now, it only put more distrust as we all are starting to see the possibility of the excuse being a simple BS.
The one making the so called technical reasons are Apple. So it's on Apple to actually show hard evidence of their claim. Only Apple can show it as no consumer would be able to have that feature enabled on the previous gen ipads.
So you are asking Apple developers to create a version of Stage Manager just for older iPads that would lack the external monitor support? Remember, this is more than mirroring, it’s a second independent desktop. That’s a big ask considering the speed of Apple’s software release cycles
No, they don’t have to do anything. They decided to only release it for M1 iPads and that’s it. They don’t have to do anything else
I think a lot of people are just going through the stages of grief for a cool feature, one that’s legitimately awesome (been rocking it for a few days). Sure, I get the disappointment. But endlessly arguing over it is pointless. The decision was made, and they won’t change their minds.
This is much more disrespectful than I think you intended.
Do older ipads run a special version of iPadOS? No, it's the same OS. So why do they need to create a special version of stage manager? Per Apple's own statement, the issue is simply performance, that older ipads lack the performance required compare to the M1, not some issue needing special version. That's Apple's own words.