Apple Reportedly Working on Touchscreen Macs, Including MacBook Pro

[darngooddesign]

Respectfully I didn’t misunderstand your point. I reiterate that it is wishful thinking that running macOS on an iPad would be just as performant as running macOS on a MacBook Air just because they can have the same CPU and memory specs. It’s even more wishful thinking for anyone to assume macOS on an iPad Pro would be as performant as iPadOS is.

Unlike the MacBook Air, the iPad Pro‘s components more compact and have a display (that generates a little heat) mounted directly above the CPU. It doesn’t have a great thermal design to run something as intensive as macOS.

iPadOS is lightweight and suspends background apps. That makes it perfectly tuned for tablets. macOS is too heavy for it.

As for memory consumption, here’s an example that everyone should know by now. In fact I’m a little gobsmacked that we are having this debate at all.

When I boot up macOS on my Mac it already consumes 8GB Of RAM, the same amount of RAM I have on my iPad. That includes 1GB of third party services.

This is without any apps running.

View attachment 2141979

That number grows. After a few hours it’s almost double. Adobe‘s background services consume about half a GB. Tolerable on a desktop environment, not tolerable for handhelds like tablets.

The Wacom driver alone grows from a few hundred megabytes at boot up to almost 2 GB after using it for a day. Tolerable on a desktop environment, not tolerable for handhelds like tablets.

Other third party services and drivers do the same thing.


View attachment 2141980

This is simply not a suitable system for an iPad Pro. It could run, but one shouldn’t assume that they can switch from iPadOS to macOS on an iPad Pro and get equal performance and that the heat generated by macOS apps would be tolerable in a tablet.

Knowing how people already complain about the heat or stability of different products, there’s no point giving them something sub-optimal or they just complain even more.

Let it go. macOS is for Macs. iPadOS is for iPads. We would just like to see better apps and better windowing options for iPadOS.

If there was macOS for a tablet, it would just be a chunkier tablet with higher specs and it wouldn’t be called an iPad.

I think you might be the one who doesn't understand how MacOS and the M# use RAM and Swap. Even the 8GB M1 MBA has proven to be remarkably work-capable despite only having 8GB RAM, but if an 8GB iPad isn't enough for your workload, buy the 16GB one. I suspect that if Apple releases MacOS for iPads, you'll be able to upgrade your RAM to the 24GB of the M2 or whatever the M3's limit is. Just like how Stage Manager is RAM feature-limited on older 4GB and 6GB iPads, the 8GB iPads will be dual-boot only while the 16GB+ iPads will be hot swappable between the two.

MacOS on the iPad is not for someone who needs a 32GB M1-Max MBP.

PS. iPad OS no longer automatically suspends background apps because Stage Manager now lets you have up to 8 live apps.

 

[NEPOBABY]

I think you might be the one who doesn't understand how MacOS and the M# use RAM and Swap. But if 8GB RAM isn't enough, buy the 16GB one.

You‘re replying simply for the sake of argument without reading anything. I’ve already explained these two systems manage apps in memory and background states very differently and that after a few hours macOS alone with apps closed will consume all that 16GB.

macOS apps running on top would need a lot more memory and some of those apps need much better thermals.

Having options for even higher memory like 32 or 64GB in an iPad Pro sounds easy, but the heat from those memory chips has to be managed too and they also consume space. Would have to wait for smaller and denser chips.

Go to the developer forum and say all these things and you’ll get dozens of people telling you what I’ve told you about resource consumption. You’ll just be screaming at a wall if you refuse to accept what devs tell you.

 

[darngooddesign]

You‘re replying simply for the sake of argument without reading anything. I’ve already explained these two systems manage apps in memory and background states very differently and that after a few hours macOS alone with apps closed will consume all that 16GB.

macOS apps running on top would need a lot more memory and some of those apps need much better thermals.

Having options for even higher memory like 32 or 64GB in an iPad Pro sounds easy, but the heat from those memory chips has to be managed too and they also consume space. Would have to wait for smaller and denser chips.

Go to the developer forum and say all these things and you’ll get dozens of people telling you what I’ve told you about resource consumption. You’ll just be screaming at a wall if you refuse to accept what devs tell you.

I'm arguing because you are incorrect that an iPad couldn't run MacOS under a light to moderate workload. MacOS using a lot of RAM at idle doesn't actually mean anything bad because that's what its designed to do. Memory Pressure, not RAM used, is what's important.

That being said, you are correct that it couldn't run an intensive workload; if your 8GB Memory Pressure is regularly yellow, buy the 16GB one, and if your 16GB Memory Pressure is regularly yellow don't buy an iPad to run MacOS. If your iPad regularly gets hot under MacOS you should have exchanged it for a MBA, and if your MBA regularly gets hot you should have exchanged it for a MBP. Thermals are also important and an iPad would throttle before a MBA just like a MBA throttles before a MBP. Do your research based on your workload and intended uses to avoid problems.

If you still buy the iPad and have a bad experience with MacOS, well... you have no one to blame but yourself.

 

[k1121j]

If it detached then perhaps.

 

[CaspianKing]

I need a Thinner & Lighter Macbook Pro 16. Try carrying it for one whole day.

 

[koelsh]

A Mac is a Mac and an iPad is an iPad.

It helps to understand product segmentation is important not just for consistency and preventing too many bugs, but also for marketing and sales.

An iPhone is an iPhone and an iPod is an iPod is what people would be saying if Steve hadn’t made it clear from the start iPhone was the way forward. Yes indeed there’s market segmentation between the iPad and Mac. By siloing use cases and functionality they’ve required strongly “encouraged” people to buy both putting profits over usability over people.

The performance of iPads have shown for years now that segmentation is artificial and has far more to do with Apple protecting their precious App Store than anything else.

As I wrote: I don't even want to pay for such a rubbish

What else do Mac laptops have that you don’t want to pay for? Do people who never use the webcam demand to not pay for it? Do people who never use the internal speakers need a refund?

 

[jamface]

Why is everyone complaining? It's not like they're going to take away the trackpad. Just don't use the touch screen if you don't want to.

They already took away the trackpad and the keyboard on my iPad. Who knows how far they could go?!

Although now I think about it, they have more recently made an effort to return these... basically I think they’ll do anything in the name of continuing to make money.

 

[TundraKing]

You will most likely disagree with everything you said after some thought and conversation.

A Mac is a Mac and an iPad is an iPad.

It helps to understand product segmentation is important not just for consistency and preventing too many bugs, but also for marketing and sales.



Others have chimed in on this thread that macOS running on an iPad would consume more resources than iPadOS does. macOS apps would consume a lot more resources than iPadOS apps. Battery life won’t last long and then some people who aren’t technically savvy will complain “why can’t macOS have the same battery life as iPadOS?”

These devices might share some frameworks and architecture, but the hardware design and overall needs of both systems are very different. Their memory management also differs, which is why iPadOS can run decently with much less memory.

Could you run a dozen macOS apps smoothly on macOS with 4GB or 8GB RAM? Of course not, especially with some of that RAM now shared with the GPU.

So no, an iPad Pro is not equal to a MacBook Air. Geekbench numbers don’t tell the full story.

People tend to retreat to their respective "camps" and don't seem to acknowledge that there are MANY different valid real use cases for all these devices. Apple will follow the money with their own strategy regardless of what we may want or think.

Again this is not 2010. The 12.9" iPad Pro vs. the M1 MacBook Air battery capacity is 41 vs 49 in their current form. All the runtime numbers that I have seen published indicate that current draw between the two OS's don't show a substantial difference when running equivalent apps or functions under their respective OS's. In other words the M1 MacBook Air is rated at up to 18 hrs video playback with a 49 WH battery vs an iPad Pro 12.9" at 10 hrs with a 41 WH battery....

I'd like to understand what differences you are talking about as the numbers don't seem to bear that out but I don't know every intricate technical detail of the two devices. From a users perspective the two machines essentially have the same capabilities it is their respective underlying OS's that restrict their use. Sure a very CPU intensive app will increase current draw but that seems to occur on both platforms almost equally.

Also if absolutely necessary there is nothing preventing a slightly larger battery in a Mac tablet type device to make it equivalent to an MBAir as the weight and form factor of MacBook Air w/o keyboard/tracpad would be little different than an equivalent sized iPad.

Yes, my opinion is that the current state of technology in Apple iPad Pro /MacBook Air devices render any talk of technical differences moot as they seem to be trivial. Again its just from my viewpoint as I don't know every technical detail.

Low end iPads will always have their place by themselves as will the MacBook Pro and desktop Macs. But the middle ground is where much of the action is today. Users want flexible devices..... that is a fact. Apple is seemingly thinking of following this trend as the market will force them there if they wish to continue to grow their business.

 

[Phoenix1000]

What else do Mac laptops have that you don’t want to pay for? Do people who never use the webcam demand to not pay for it? Do people who never use the internal speakers need a refund?

Serious working is not looking on a screen full with thumbs and other dirt. A Mac is a serious tool for me, an iPad is just a gadget - usable for surfing, perhaps checking mails oder managing other devices. But not usable for serious work. A notebook with a touch screen I can buy from Microsoft for less money - in my eyes also more a gadget than a serious device. If Apple thinks, they must turn the Mac into a poorly gadget: Welcome. But I will not buy this scrap. That simple.

 

[jakey rolling]

Serious working is not looking on a screen full with thumbs and other dirt. A Mac is a serious tool for me, an iPad is just a gadget - usable for surfing, perhaps checking mails oder managing other devices. But not usable for serious work. A notebook with a touch screen I can buy from Microsoft for less money - in my eyes also more a gadget than a serious device. If Apple thinks, they must turn the Mac into a poorly gadget: Welcome. But I will not buy this scrap. That simple.

"I could never use a touch screen. I'm creative".
- You, right now.

 

[koelsh]

Serious working is not looking on a screen full with thumbs and other dirt. A Mac is a serious tool for me, an iPad is just a gadget - usable for surfing, perhaps checking mails oder managing other devices. But not usable for serious work. A notebook with a touch screen I can buy from Microsoft for less money - in my eyes also more a gadget than a serious device. If Apple thinks, they must turn the Mac into a poorly gadget: Welcome. But I will not buy this scrap. That simple.

If fingerprints were the issue we’d have constant hysteria over the iPhone, iPad, Android phones and tablets, Windows tablets and so on. Instead, crickets.

iPads aren’t usable for serious work because of the App Store and iPadOS but that’s a different discussion.

How does adding a touch screen make something a mere gadget? Putting a radio in an F150 does not reduce its effectiveness as a work truck.

 

[enterthemerdaverse]

I'm arguing because you are incorrect that an iPad couldn't run MacOS under a light to moderate workload. MacOS using a lot of RAM at idle doesn't actually mean anything bad because that's what its designed to do. Memory Pressure, not RAM used, is what's important.

That being said, you are correct that it couldn't run an intensive workload; if your 8GB Memory Pressure is regularly yellow, buy the 16GB one, and if your 16GB Memory Pressure is regularly yellow don't buy an iPad to run MacOS. If your iPad regularly gets hot under MacOS you should have exchanged it for a MBA, and if your MBA regularly gets hot you should have exchanged it for a MBP. Thermals are also important and an iPad would throttle before a MBA just like a MBA throttles before a MBP. Do your research based on your workload and intended uses to avoid problems.

If you still buy the iPad and have a bad experience with MacOS, well... you have no one to blame but yourself.

There's some errors in your way of thinking. A device has to be designed with all user types in mind,, not just some and then victim shame the rest like you did in your last sentence. That's why the iPad and iOS developer guidelines to date have advocated lighter apps that don't consume excessive power. Those guidelines would be impossible and unworkable if macOS ran optionally on the iPad.

We have had workloads on the Mac that have expanded our MBP batteries and warped the case. I don't see anyone (sensible) wanting that kind of risk on their iPads.

 

[Phoenix1000]

How does adding a touch screen make something a mere gadget? Putting a radio in an F150 does not reduce its effectiveness as a work truck.

You already mentioned the point: The "fusion" of MacOSs and iOS/iPadOS. The Mac and MacOS for me is on the way to perfection in terms of usability and interaction with the device. So "integration" of iOS elements can only make it worse. The touchscreen is the necessary control element for the iOS/iPadOS integration - and I simply don't like that. But I agree, that's perhaps another topic. Hopefully, Apple is gracious with me and the "pure" Mac without touchscreen and iOS/iPadOS will be sold alongside the touchscreen Mac. Hope dies last ...

 

[Phoenix1000]

"I could never use a touch screen. I'm creative".
- You, right now.

Yeah, I agree, you are right. I had the same thought when I went to bed yesterday evening. I had to exclude creative working people, of course. I simply was too tired to turn on the Mac once again. Sorry for that.

 

[wbeasley]

I need a Thinner & Lighter Macbook Pro 16. Try carrying it for one whole day.

Maybe time to subscribe to that Apple Fitness app...

Seriously, anyone who thinks Apple devices are heavy never lived through the 90s luggable laptops...

 

[darngooddesign]

There's some errors in your way of thinking. A device has to be designed with all user types in mind,, not just some and then victim shame the rest like you did in your last sentence.

Not really. The iMac and MacStudio were not designed for laptop users. The MacBook Air was not designed for people who do 3D rendering all day on dual external displays. Buying an iPad to run MacOS when you know you need a MBP doesn't make you a victim.

That's why the iPad and iOS developer guidelines to date have advocated lighter apps that don't consume excessive power. Those guidelines would be impossible and unworkable if macOS ran optionally on the iPad.

Those guidelines still mostly apply to the iPad side of it, but even still do you think Davinci Resolve, for example, adheres to that guideline?

We have had workloads on the Mac that have expanded our MBP batteries and warped the case. I don't see anyone (sensible) wanting that kind of risk on their iPads.

Thats the problem with thinking that a device has to be designed for all users; you should have used a desktop computer instead. Of course it really didn't take much to overheat an Intel MBP and some of them had hardware issues that caused battery swelling. Apple already avoids thermal issues on the fanless MBAs with CPU/GPU throttling and there is no reason why the same thing wouldn't happen with MacOS on iPads, just more aggressively.

 

[NEPOBABY]

An iPhone is an iPhone and an iPod is an iPod is what people would be saying if Steve hadn’t made it clear from the start iPhone was the way forward. Yes indeed there’s market segmentation between the iPad and Mac. By siloing use cases and functionality they’ve required strongly “encouraged” people to buy both putting profits over usability over people.

The performance of iPads have shown for years now that segmentation is artificial and has far more to do with Apple protecting their precious App Store than anything else.

That sounds like a conspiracy theory and you should talk to developers about the limits of the iPads, not just in terms of software but also running desktop level software on this hardware. Just having a decent CPU doesn’t make it suitable.

 

[NEPOBABY]

There's some errors in your way of thinking. A device has to be designed with all user types in mind,, not just some and then victim shame the rest like you did in your last sentence. That's why the iPad and iOS developer guidelines to date have advocated lighter apps that don't consume excessive power. Those guidelines would be impossible and unworkable if macOS ran optionally on the iPad.

We have had workloads on the Mac that have expanded our MBP batteries and warped the case. I don't see anyone (sensible) wanting that kind of risk on their iPads.

Also, running macOS and macOS apps on an iPad would damage the display because the CPU sits directly underneath it. There’s a reason why the Studio Display is thick and has ventilation. The iPad has nothing to protect the display from heat incurred damage.

 

[NEPOBABY]

Not really. The iMac and MacStudio were not designed for laptop users. The MacBook Air was not designed for people who do 3D rendering all day on dual external displays. Buying an iPad to run MacOS when you know you need a MBP doesn't make you a victim.

Those guidelines still mostly apply to the iPad side of it, but even still do you think Davinci Resolve, for example, adheres to that guideline?

See my response to them about CPU inccured heat damage to the display.

Davinci Resolve on the iPad is a lite version. Photoshop for iPad is a light version. They are not macOS versions and they aren’t running on a heavy OS.

Read the iOS developer guidelines regarding excessive CPU usage and you’ll stop waffling with these tired responses. You‘re just trying to fake it until you make it with your replies.

 

[darngooddesign]

See my response to them about CPU inccured heat damage to the display.

Apple can throttle the CPU/GPU to avoid heat damage.

Davinci Resolve on the iPad is a lite version. Photoshop for iPad is a light version. They are not macOS versions and they aren’t running on a heavy OS.

Resolve is heavier than iMovie, Lightroom and Photoshop are both heavier than Photos, Procreate is heavier than Paper, etc. These advanced iPad apps are heavier than lite to moderate Mac apps.

 

[NEPOBABY]

Apple can throttle the CPU/GPU to avoid heat damage.

The throttling would need to be quite a bit to control the kind of heat macOS and macOS apps can generate. So everything will run slow and people will complain on forums. Others users will reply ’You should have bought a proper Mac’.

You achieved nothing.

 

[enterthemerdaverse]

Also, running macOS and macOS apps on an iPad would damage the display because the CPU sits directly underneath it. There’s a reason why the Studio Display is thick and has ventilation. The iPad has nothing to protect the display from heat incurred damage.

Reasoning with fans who don't code or understand thermals is impossible 😂 it's like those folks who think they can live in VR all day or that Apple's XR headset will have all day battery life with dual M2 cpus and 10 cameras and they can just safely walk around and drive with it on their heads. 🤣

 

[RealTinyPenguin]

Anyone dismissing this functionality is missing the key use case and benefit for a touchscreen Mac (and why they should have had them for awhile), that use case being testing mobile development on a Mac. Testing touch interactions, targets, etc would be so useful, and one could avoid always having to have a phone connected.

 

[diego]

It would be nice, provided they remove the notch, please.

I agree, but the notch is an integral part of the strategy to getting people used to the idea that eventually there will be a camera behind the screen and there will be nothing you can do to turn it off. Obviously the notch right now is absolutely useless, like who cares about gaining that minimal screen real estate to watch a video?

 

[toy547]

At least do a touchscreen iMac, not a MacBook Pro or Air.