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 Patent Suggests Future iPad Could Transform Into macOS-Like Experience When Attached to a Keyboard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I for one am tired of using gimped applications on the iPad. Even Pages is missing features from the desktop equivalent. Pain in the ass to have to turn to the Mac to make certain edits to the document layout because the iPad doesn’t allow you to setup certain document properties.
Omni software is incredible on the Mac. So-so on the iPad.
Office, can’t write/edit VBA.
Mac contacts and calendars, can’t create groups. Can’t copy and paste events.
It just goes on and on. And my 11” iPad Pro is probably 10x as powerful as the 11.6 inch Macbook Air I have. So hardware is not an issue.
I know I wasn’t asked, but Jump Desktop is second to none IMHO.
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I wouldn't say that.
Apple is taking the reverse approach from Microsoft: taking an OS designed for touch and giving it desktop features.
Microsoft took a desktop/mouse-based OS and shoehorned it onto touch-screen devices.
Samsung is the one that had the right idea all along, and I'm glad Apple may FINALLY be putting their own spin (AKA copying) on this.
Let's wait and see if the implementation is what y'all expect.
Personally, I like the iPad as-is (aside from the screen output to monitor issues), but my needs are very, very basic.
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I hope not. Apple's tuning is what makes their devices great.
M1+ iPads only makes sense for this.
Base iPads will remain as-is I think, which is fine for most non-pro users.
Apple could just split the iPadOS version builds in their App Store when checking the target device to be updated/upgraded.
I guess the split in the iPad market is to blame. There aren't many people that buy a Mac just for casual computing whereas the iPad market is actually 2 distinct ones.
Unlike the iPhone where 'Pro' means no software differences and a few 'nice-to-haves' in an effort to dupe customers into thinking their regular iPhone is inferior, the iPad Pro is actually used by professionals for whom the base model of iPad is too limited in hardware and software compatibility.
Thus you have the casual buyers who just need an internet tablet with a few games on it and you have people our end of the market using them for CAD, Photography, Music Production etc.
And just as the 'Pro' iPhone should have software features the regular iPhone doesn't have so should the Pro iPad get some the regular model doesn't have. There is no reason why the M1 iPad couldn't run Mac apps in a sandbox when docked with a keyboard.
This is the closest I could findI like the iPad wallpaper in the first imagewhere can I get it?
Attachments
A lot of work needed to iPadOS to make all this a feasible reality, not least the fact that like a 40 year old Commodore 64 the iPad doesn't support caching to disk (SSD) when the memory gets full, so everything you do is restricted by how much physical memory you have on board your iPad. That's the main reason why most iPad apps are gimped versions of their desktop equivalents: you need a new fully-loaded 2.5K iPad to run software you can run on a five year old Macbook Air.
Last edited:
That’s a good point, one I haven’t thought of. Sounds like something Apple needs to address ASAP. I’d be willing to purchase a new iPad Pro for that alone.
Apple is in a tough spot because without introducing cache to disk, I see no reason to ever replace my current iPad Pro 11”. It’ll be 20 years before iOS is advanced enough to tax the processor in it. ?
No I didn't realise it either until someone recently brought it up on another thread. Ironically they were using it as a reason to defend why desktop-class MacOS apps shouldn't be brought to the iPad, i.e.: only the very best fully-loaded iPads would be able to run them. I don't think they grasped that it's an iOS/iPadOS design decision that Apple could easily change on a whim.
And a laptop can do that perfectly, especially in a couch. What you do get with a laptop contra a iPad is that you get fylly-featured apps and not their castrated lite versions. You also get a normal keyboard and and touchpad with a hinge that allows for much more solid device than a tablet propped up with a gimmicky add-on that does not support anything but a firm flat surface.
There is a much more sound way of doing it - like the ZenPad, which features a keyboard-touchpad-battery-dock thing (or the way Surface does it), where the other half turns the device into a real laptop.
This will however never happen to an Apple device - since it would "eat away" its own segment - the Air laptops. And with the tablet chips becoming ever more powerful (and the "mac pro" users being not always that very... "pro") the chances are a majority of users wouldot for an iPad instead of the Macbook lineup.
Apple deliberately segments users into groups - and allows only certain kind of authorised accessories and only certain types of features - because that's what it's like running one's own monopoly - you can't (and shouldn't) compete against yourself.
So no, nice try but I don't buy your explenation at all.
Not for me, no laptop has as good of a touch/mobile experience as iPad does. Then when I want to use it at a desk, I would prefer a set up like this article describes. Best of both worlds. I understand if you don't agree, different people prefer different things.
Last edited:
Ironic really: Suggest you want sideloading on iOS and people say buy Android. Say you want Mac Apps on the iPad and people would burn you for suggesting you just buy a Mac.
I feel like maybe you're cherry picking your observations to support a weak attempt to stereotype. I've seen conversations where the people who were told to buy Android to get their sideloading option were equally incensed. I'm pretty sure some of those conversations were in this very forum, actually.
Also, suggesting that someone buy a vaguely comparable product (one cell phone over another cell phone) seems a lot more reasonable to me than suggesting that someone buy a potentially significantly more expensive computer instead of using the cell phone (or tablet) that they already have.
I happily use Android instead of iOS for that very reason. But I do wish Apple played a little more nicely with 3rd parties. I'm not saying everything needs to be ported over but would it really be so bad if they ported Notes and Mail to Android?
Why would Apple burn the resources to do that? Android has their own native Notes and Mail programs. You want Apple's Notes and Mail, buy Apple's products. What's next; Reminders, iMovie, and iWork?
I said evolution for the iPad. Not pc tablet. i know about the surface. But when Apple does it, they’ll do it right. Seamless integration of software & hardware.
To build upon Razorpit's response: Sometimes, native apps aren't actually the best solution to a given problem. In the two particular examples you cited, there would be absolutely no incentive for Apple to offer those features to people who have never actually purchased any of Apple's products -- but for people who have purchased one or more of their products in the past, and possibly migrated away from them, there are options for reclaiming your data:
For Apple Notes, you can just log into Apple's web-hosted iCloud interface from any Android based web browser, and all of your Notes are still there. You can actually continue to use them right where they are, or you can copy/paste the content into some other Android native note taking app.
For Apple Mail... well, if you're talking about a tablet or a desktop, than web-iCloud is still an option, but I'm pretty sure that for smaller devices (i.e. phones) you'd have to find another solution -- but it's still not that difficult, as all you really need is to login to your account from any standard IMAP client, of which I dare say there are quite a few Android native options. And again, the same commentary applies: either continue using the account where it is, or migrate your data.
So really, what would be the point of Apple making Android native apps for either of those use cases?
I guess in my head its to play nicer with other ecosystems. If I use Google or Microsoft for all my digital organisation I can buy an iPhone or Android and replace pretty much every default app with one of theirs. I use my iPad Pro as a Google-powered tablet on the most part.
Apple doesn't play nice with Android or Windows. Their iCloud web portal is an afterthought, their Windows sync software a joke and the only redeeming thing is I can still use iTunes on Windows instead of 3 different apps. Apple Music on Android is brilliant and has a widget that skips and pauses tracks!
I will freely admit that I'm a big fan of Apple's products -- but I also believe in recognizing when a company is just doing what companies do in order to be profitable. So I get what you're saying, but as I alluded before, I just don't think there's a profit incentive for Apple to do what you're seeking. The Google software products that you use (and honestly, that I use as well) are profitable for Google, because we are the product; they track everything that we do, so there is a clear incentive for them to draw us into their ecosystem, regardless of what type of device either of us happen to be using. Simply put: Apple's business model works differently.
As to Apple Music on Android: It probably is indeed a very slick and well written app (I don't actually know from personal experience, as I've not used the Android version) and that's all well and good -- but the bottom line is, it's a marketplace for buying music through Apple. It exists first and foremost because it is quite literally a profit center.
Last edited:
um… not so much. The Surface is notoriously plagued with freezing, unexpected shutdowns, and touchscreen response issues. When Apple does an iPad/laptop hybrid, they’ll do it right with none of those issues. ?