Sidebar Sidebar
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

Ludatyk said:
But the amount of attention this has drawn seems overwhelming
Click to expand...
It’s because everyone with even an inkling of a social media presence KNOWS that they can post, repost, amply other’s posts and reposts and gain a few followers in the process. It doesn’t matter what, post anything about Apple (the more negative the further the reach) and watch the attention flow in your direction!

Apple could make it available on the Mac Plus and the same cast of characters would be positing why they didn’t bring it to the IIGS!?!? When it comes down to it, Apple’s in business to make money. And, because of their minority market position across the board, there could be 5 million people that decide THIS is the hill they’re going to die on and it wouldn’t matter. As long as there are 40 million others or so that DO want, say, the iPad (which sells 40 million a year), then Apple maintains healthy sales and profits and stays in business.

With over 6 billion people in the world, my guess is that they’ll be able to find that 40 million this year.
 
prospervic said:
I often see this claim being made about Apple on these forums. It would be helpful for once if someone would provide examples with evidence.
Click to expand...
The information comes from Apple and as long as one ignores parts of the data, then it’s a valid claim to make. :) Apple DOES indicate they sold fewer iPads than intended but ALSO said it was due to the component shortages. If they’d had more of the hot selling iPads (selling at twice the rate of Macs), they’d have sold more iPads.
 
Unregistered 4U said:
The information comes from Apple and as long as one ignores parts of the data, then it’s a valid claim to make. :) Apple DOES indicate they sold fewer iPads than intended but ALSO said it was due to the component shortages. If they’d had more of the hot selling iPads (selling at twice the rate of Macs), they’d have sold more iPads.
Click to expand...

Shortages may have driven it (in part?) but in the end it is still a drop and something companies try to recover.
Apple is no different.
 
dk001 said:
Shortages may have driven it (in part?) but in the end it is still a drop and something companies try to recover.
Apple is no different.
Click to expand...
So a component shortage equates to lackluster sales due to consumer choice? As they say it all looks the same on the scoresheet, except in this case when shortages ease the iPads can sell at higher volumes due to consumer interest.
 
Unregistered 4U said:
The information comes from Apple and as long as one ignores parts of the data, then it’s a valid claim to make. :) Apple DOES indicate they sold fewer iPads than intended but ALSO said it was due to the component shortages. If they’d had more of the hot selling iPads (selling at twice the rate of Macs), they’d have sold more iPads.
Click to expand...
This is true, buts it’s not evidence of dk001’s claim that ”Apple has been known to push the issues to drive sales”. In fact, it proves the opposite.
 
dk001 said:
Shortages may have driven it (in part?) but in the end it is still a drop and something companies try to recover.
Apple is no different.
Click to expand...
A drop due to loss of consumer interest, is different than a drop due to component shortages, whereby consumers would start buying again when and if the devices became available. And sure it all looks the same on the balance sheet, except for the former there is no easy recovery and the latter Apple will just report the increase in revenue.
 
dk001 said:
Shortages may have driven it (in part?) but in the end it is still a drop and something companies try to recover.
Apple is no different.
Click to expand...
Yes, but all I’m saying is
“We sold less because people still definitely want to buy them, we just couldn’t make enough.”
is a completely different statement from
“We sold less because people really don’t want to buy them.”
 
I7guy said:
So a component shortage equates to lackluster sales due to consumer choice? As they say it all looks the same on the scoresheet, except in this case when shortages ease the iPads can sell at higher volumes due to consumer interest.
Click to expand...

To your point they all look the same. As a result of lower sales the company will most likely push to find a way to make up those sales or at minimum show an increase.
 
I7guy said:
A drop due to loss of consumer interest, is different than a drop due to component shortages, whereby consumers would start buying again when and if the devices became available. And sure it all looks the same on the balance sheet, except for the former there is no easy recovery and the latter Apple will just report the increase in revenue.
Click to expand...

While this is true, it is the only pipeline, as far as I know, to show this drop. From an investor perspective, this makes that drop questionable; was is really all do to constraints in the supply chain?

adding @Unregistered 4U
 
prospervic said:
This is true, buts it’s not evidence of dk001’s claim that ”Apple has been known to push the issues to drive sales”. In fact, it proves the opposite.
Click to expand...
No, it’s absolutely not. BUT, when one is attempting to maintain a mindset that is at odds with reality, all input must be twisted to fit that mindset. For example, when Apple iPad sales rise back to where they were prior to the component shortage, that doesn’t fit the mindset that “people like iPads” so the reason for the rise could be “SEE restricting the feature led to more sales!” even though the majority of iPads Apple will have sold won’t even be capable of the feature that supposedly drove the sales. :)

OR, Apple’s buying masses of iPads and are dumping them in the ocean to give the appearance of folks wanting iPads.
OR, Apple’s paying the folks that analyze unit sales in order to artificially bump up the unit sales.
Both of these have the same amount of fact behind them, but both CAN be said to be “reasons” for any future rise in the sales of iPads.
 
Last edited:
dk001 said:
To your point they all look the same. As a result of lower sales the company will most likely push to find a way to make up those sales or at minimum show an increase.
Click to expand...
Apple will make up the sales of iPads with iPads. They are not Going to make up revenue with sleazy tactics or price increases.
 
I7guy said:
Apple will make up the sales of iPads with iPads. They are not Going to make up revenue with sleazy tactics or price increases.
Click to expand...

We differ in that thought.
I always want to believe the best of Apple however they have not always behaved that way.

Anyway, I'll look at a new iPad when the M3 comes out unless I find something else (non-Apple) beforehand that is top notch.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: I7guy
dk001 said:
We differ in that thought.
I always want to believe the best of Apple however they have not always behaved that way.

Anyway, I'll look at a new iPad when the M3 comes out unless I find something else (non-Apple) beforehand that is top notch.
Click to expand...
Because you may have done something untoward in younger years, does that make you a criminal for life? But sure as we all know, ymmv.
 
Unregistered 4U said:
No, it’s absolutely not. BUT, when one is attempting to maintain a mindset that is at odds with reality, all input must be twisted to fit that mindset. For example, when Apple iPad sales rise back to where they were prior to the component shortage, that doesn’t fit the mindset that “people like iPads” so the reason for the rise could be “SEE restricting the feature led to more sales!” even though the majority of iPads Apple will have sold won’t even be capable of the feature that supposedly drove the sales. :)

OR, Apple’s buying masses of iPads and are dumping them in the ocean to give the appearance of folks wanting iPads.
OR, Apple’s paying the folks that analyze unit sales in order to artificially bump up the unit sales.
Both of these have the same amount of fact behind them, but both CAN be said to be “reasons” for any future rise in the sales of iPads.
Click to expand...
It's uncertain (due to the fragmented conversation) if you're rebutting my points, or dk001's. But, in any case I agree with you on the mindset issue. People who tend to look for nefarious motives in every decision a business makes typically either 1. Have never run any kind of business themselves and don't understand how business people really think, or 2. Have an overall negative and skeptical view of people, the world and life itself.
 
A Possible Solution for pre-M1 iPads Pro?

On this week's Connected podcast (episode #402) iPad maestro Federico Viticci presents both sides of the argument whether Apple should/could enable Stage Manager on pre-M1 iPads Pro. He acknowledges his tech-geek bias, but nonetheless comes up with a compromise solution that's well thought-out and could possibly satisfy many users.

TL;DR - he suggests Apple could get Stage Manager to work on pre-M1 IPPs, but it would be limited to 3 apps simultaneously and not include full external display support (mirroring would still work as before).

Viticci points out there is precedent for this: when Split View was introduced in iOS 9 it worked on iPad Air 2 and the then-new iPad Pro, while previous iPads only supported Slide Over.
This discussion begins at 38:22 and is well worth a listen. https://www.relay.fm/connected/402
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: _Spinn_
prospervic said:
It's uncertain (due to the fragmented conversation) if you're rebutting my points, or dk001's. But, in any case I agree with you on the mindset issue. People who tend to look for nefarious motives in every decision a business makes typically either 1. Have never run any kind of business themselves and don't understand how business people really think, or 2. Have an overall negative and skeptical view of people, the world and life itself.
Click to expand...
I’m not rebutting your points. I agree with you and just went further into why you may be seeing some of the posts here that don’t appear to align with reality. For some, there is an intentional attempt to look for nefarious purposes and imagination can create infinite nefarious scenarios that, to them, are just as valid as reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
Unregistered 4U said:
I’m not rebutting your points. I agree with you and just went further into why you may be seeing some of the posts here that don’t appear to align with reality. For some, there is an intentional attempt to look for nefarious purposes and imagination can create infinite nefarious scenarios that, to them, are just as valid as reality.
Click to expand...
Alas, this is true, and more frequent these days.
 
Unregistered 4U said:
I’m not rebutting your points. I agree with you and just went further into why you may be seeing some of the posts here that don’t appear to align with reality. For some, there is an intentional attempt to look for nefarious purposes and imagination can create infinite nefarious scenarios that, to them, are just as valid as reality.
Click to expand...
And sometimes those nefarious things are actual reality that people are outright dismissing because they’re nefarious and think Apple is incapable of doing wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back