Apple Tested Stage Manager on iPads Without M1 Chip and Wasn't Satisfied

[teh_hunterer]

Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head

Apple A12Z Bionic vs Apple A15 Bionic - Benchmarks, Tests and Comparisons

www.notebookcheck.net

A12z geekbench multiple score is around same as a15 in iphone 13 pro max.

6gb ram is enough for any model OS

Ok then keep repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring the people who are giving you information that you clearly don't know.

 

[Pankeborg]

Please apple, don’t be so defensive. You don’t need to explain why this new feature doesn’t work on two year old machines.

 

[chenks]

Perhaps maybe they did it for sales

of course they did it for sales, apple do this all the time.

 

[petsk]

Well, Apple has never had any problem *forcing* out software updates that have crippled both iphones and ipads before.

Making a device unusable because it can’t handle the software is stupid as hell. I have an old ipad mini 2 and 3 with iOS 12 or whatever and both are more or less unusable because the software is bogging them down.

 

[Seanm87]

Well, Apple has never had any problem *forcing* out software updates that have crippled both iphones and ipads before.

Making a device unusable because it can’t handle the software is stupid as hell. I have an old ipad mini 2 and 3 with iOS 12 or whatever and both are more or less unusable because the software is bogging them down.

Maybe they don't want to make the same mistake again?

 

[sorgo †]

Here’s your “engineering explanation.” 🤪

 

[DrJR]

Does the Magic Keyboard with Touch ID work with iPad Pro? Can I shut the screen on my iPad Pro off? Like fold it down?

 

[babyexercise]

Ok then keep repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring the people who are giving you information that you clearly don't know.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i5_8257u-961-vs-apple_a12z_bionic-1651

Last i5 in last macbook pro which runs latest MacOS, has much lower multiple geekbench score than a12z

I have proved pro 2020 has more than enough to full whole ipadOS 16 in my replies, with links and benchmarks

Keep telling me "ipadOS 16 just likes M1 not Intel,just believe my 6th sense" kind of your own feeling comments without any number in benchmarks or test does not help the discussion.

 

[makitango]

Yes, I would completely agree that the A15 Bionic would never be able to pull it off while running intense 3D applications without an issue.

/s

I would add to the title „, says xyz“ to keep journalism in check. I was, to some extent, expecting to see some proof or read an opinion of an anonymous source, not the marketing outlet‘s voice.

 

[Kdvl7]

It's real simple: Craig Federighi simply stated that only the iPads equipped with a M1 chip are powerful enough to make Stage Manager work. I personally see nothing shocking in what he said and I look forward to testing it.

 

[aevan]

Here’s your “engineering explanation.” 🤪

When noticing how hard it is for people to understand Apple's explanation and that Macs and iPads are not the same, that expectations are not the same, I'd say those girls understand engineering better than some people here.

 

[aevan]

[This is personal opinion] I have full respect for Apple. Perhaps maybe they did it for sales, but for the most part I believe them.

instead of launching it and have customer complaints about performance, they know it performs horrible

of course they did it for sales, apple do this all the time.

Apple's goal is profit, but they don't make not short-term decisions. If they brought this feature to every iPad they sell, it would benefit them in the long run and they know it.

So when they say there's a reason they didn't do it, I believe them - because what people suggest here ("forced upgrades") would not make financial sense even in the short-term, let alone long one - and Apple is aware of that. So, I believe them this really was a technical decision. If it was a business decision, they would have Stage Manager on as many iPads as possible.

Also, people keep forgetting Apple is also people. People that use devices, people with families, people with friends and - most importantly - people that want to do their best work. While shareholders care mostly about profit, people in Apple take pride in their work. They would have serious retention problems if they asked their engineers to artificially make products worse than they are able to be. I really believe they want to make the best products they can, within the confines of technology and business. I have no loyalty towards any corporation, but I truly believe them when they say this was a decision based on performance and experience reasons. Of course, we live in a super-cynical world, so most people automatically assume it's some kind of deception.

 

[makitango]

It's real simple: Craig Federighi simply stated that only the iPads equipped with a M1 chip are powerful enough to make Stage Manager work. I personally see nothing shocking in what he said and I look forward to testing it.

I remember well all the tethering apps that allowed older and „incapable“ iPhones to use said feature without any constraints, and Apple removing them one by one after finding out they were being caught with their pants down.
The only way to test this is to temporarily enable it on non-M1 devices which we can‘t. And no proof has been provided same as there hasn‘t been anyone besides the public face of Apple‘s engineering vouching for that view.

 

[yabeweb]

People complaining about SM not present on their device probably didn't even try it.

If they did, they'd understand they are making so much fuss for a very niche feature.

To people saying Apple did it for profit, well duh? All companies make products for profit.

They make money because their stuff "just works" and they are trying to make it so, if that means not supporting a device they have all the right to do that.

Crippling the software to please a minority is NOT the way to go, so instead of making non M1 support SM for less app I prefer it to either work as intended to be removed.

That said, I don't see me using it on my Pro M1 12, so much wasted space anyway, tried and disabled so really don't see the fuss.

 

[darngooddesign]

I made comment before that I was reminded of lesser systems of yesteryear that was able to do things of a similar nature including OS/2. I find this a bit curious as to why there is such a challenge and, the amount of memory they are talking about makes me personally wonder if the programming went in a direction that is overly resource-hungry. All very curious.

Into sure why everyone is using the "my old computer had multitasking and windows" angle. How well do you think these old computers would run Adobe LR or Capture One importing and processing 100 40MP+ Raw files and Photoshop with a 100GB layered file? Since everyone is saying limit it to two apps; photo editing is one industry where the iPads are popular and that's two apps which are realistically run together.

It's not about whether it can technically run, it's about whether it can it run well.

 

[aevan]

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i5_8257u-961-vs-apple_a12z_bionic-1651

Last i5 in last macbook pro which runs latest MacOS, has much lower multiple geekbench score than a12z

I have proved pro 2020 has more than enough to full whole ipadOS 16 in my replies, with links and benchmarks

Keep telling me "ipadOS 16 just likes M1 not Intel,just believe my 6th sense" kind of your own feeling comments without any number in benchmarks or test does not help the discussion.

You're confusing CPU performance with all the things required to run Stage Manager - as has been explained in multiple posts. And also, you're ignoring the difference in expected responsiveness between the two platforms.

You really haven't proved iPad Pro 2020 has the hardware to run this feature.

 

[babyexercise]

You're confusing CPU performance with all the things required to run Stage Manager - as has been explained in multiple posts. And also, you're ignoring the difference in expected responsiveness between the two platforms.

You really haven't proved iPad Pro 2020 has the hardware to run this feature.

So you are telling me that ipadOS requirement is higher than MacOS, lol xd

 

[makitango]

So you are telling me that ipadOS requirement is higher than MacOS, lol xd

It‘s specifically optimized to run poorer on ARM platforms which is why.

/s

 

[petsk]

Maybe they don't want to make the same mistake again?

Could be, I don’t know. But their track record isn’t good because they’ve done it for years and years before.

 

[aevan]

So you are telling me that ipadOS requirement is higher than MacOS, lol xd

For some things, yes, of course - but not in terms of CPU performance, rather in terms of memory management. One of the requirements for iPadOS (until now) was to keep everything in RAM, to achieve instant responsiveness. This requirement never existed on Macs, because the expectations were different.

When I open my Intel MacBook Pro, the screen often doesn't turn on for several seconds. Imagine tapping on an iPad and getting no response for a few seconds. When my older Mac has too many things open, switching between apps causes some lag. I am used to it, especially since I can at least move my mouse cursor (it doesn't feel like the system froze). On an iPad - the expectations are higher - the touch-based response must be instantaneous. This isn't achieved with magic, it's achieved with agressive memory management and keeping everything in RAM.

It is only with M1 Macs that we reached iPad and iPhone levels of responsiveness on systems that have a different way of managing memory.

Why do you think iPhones and iPads never had swap until now? Apple didn't think of it? They were designed as touch-based, mobile devices with instantaneous response. And one of the reasons they could do that was the fact that everything is in RAM and that the system agressively shuts down apps when memory is needed.

I don't know what to tell you, there is a lot of complexity here that is hard to understand unless you're familiar with the matter. I get it - it's easy to make a mistake and think that if a 10 year old Mac can do something, surely a 2020 top of the line iPad can too. But, that's not the case, as these are very different platforms. It is the M1 that allows Macs to behave like iPads and iPads to act more like Macs. Which is great for the future of both platforms.

 

[Systra72]

Well, if it is too little ram then something terrible must have gone wrong with this software and/or the whole OS. 4GB was standard on MBA as late as 2018.

 

[Andysapple]

It must be extremely grateful for Apple to have this kind of customer base. It doesn't really matter what kind of baffling decisions they make, their base will eat it up and defend them for it.

People have been noting for years that Ipads are restricted by it's OS, and that there really isn't that much benefit in buying a PRO model.

In response, Apple make use of the obscene power of the M1 by releasing a... window manager. And apparently, this particular window manager is so resource-intensive that it can't even run on one of the still most powerful mobile chipsets in the world.

This is akin to if Microsoft would release Windows 12, but restrict the new taskbar to only run on an i9‑12900KS. It's ridiculous obviously, and definitely not something that should require an M1 to run. If indeed an M1 is required to run something this basic, I'm not sure if that actually reflects good on Apple. If they introduced features that realistically actually could be argued made use of the extra power, such as, I don't know, actual PRO apps that require more power to run I wouldn't complain, but this really aint it.

I have an iPad Pro M1 btw so this doesn't really affect me, but it does make vary of investing in the PRO product line in the future.

 

[babyexercise]

This really killed me. They gave dev a A12z powered Mac mini as a testing machine for macOS ARM and got astonishing benchmarks for a desktop OS. And now suddenly, that same chip cant handle that feature ?
That guy is a liar, and there is nothing else to say about it.
This really makes me want to move out of Apple ******** ecosystem

Good conclusion for this topic

 

[babyexercise]

For some things, yes, of course - but not in terms of CPU performance, rather in terms of memory management. One of the requirements for iPadOS (until now) was to keep everything in RAM, to achieve instant responsiveness. This requirement never existed on Macs, because the expectations were different.

When I open my Intel MacBook Pro, the screen often doesn't turn on for several seconds. Imagine tapping on an iPad and getting no response for a few seconds. When my older Mac has too many things open, switching between apps causes some lag. I am used to it, especially since I can at least move my mouse cursor (it doesn't feel like the system froze). On an iPad - the expectations are higher - the touch-based response must be instantaneous. This isn't achieved with magic, it's achieved with agressive memory management and keeping everything in RAM.

It is only with M1 Macs that we reached iPad and iPhone levels of responsiveness on systems that have a different way of managing memory.

Why do you think iPhones and iPads never had swap until now? Apple didn't think of it? They were designed as touch-based, mobile devices with instantaneous response. And one of the reasons they could do that was the fact that everything is in RAM and that the system agressively shuts down apps when memory is needed.

I don't know what to tell you, there is a lot of complexity here that is hard to understand unless you're familiar with the matter. I get it - it's easy to make a mistake and think that if a 10 year old Mac can do something, surely a 2020 top of the line iPad can too. But, that's not the case, as these are very different platforms. It is the M1 that allows Macs to behave like iPads and iPads to act more like Macs. Which is great for the future of both platforms.

You say a lot of words of your own feeling without single figure or benchmark

 

[babyexercise]

For some things, yes, of course - but not in terms of CPU performance, rather in terms of memory management. One of the requirements for iPadOS (until now) was to keep everything in RAM, to achieve instant responsiveness. This requirement never existed on Macs, because the expectations were different.

When I open my Intel MacBook Pro, the screen often doesn't turn on for several seconds. Imagine tapping on an iPad and getting no response for a few seconds. When my older Mac has too many things open, switching between apps causes some lag. I am used to it, especially since I can at least move my mouse cursor (it doesn't feel like the system froze). On an iPad - the expectations are higher - the touch-based response must be instantaneous. This isn't achieved with magic, it's achieved with agressive memory management and keeping everything in RAM.

It is only with M1 Macs that we reached iPad and iPhone levels of responsiveness on systems that have a different way of managing memory.

Why do you think iPhones and iPads never had swap until now? Apple didn't think of it? They were designed as touch-based, mobile devices with instantaneous response. And one of the reasons they could do that was the fact that everything is in RAM and that the system agressively shuts down apps when memory is needed.

I don't know what to tell you, there is a lot of complexity here that is hard to understand unless you're familiar with the matter. I get it - it's easy to make a mistake and think that if a 10 year old Mac can do something, surely a 2020 top of the line iPad can too. But, that's not the case, as these are very different platforms. It is the M1 that allows Macs to behave like iPads and iPads to act more like Macs. Which is great for the future of both platforms.

So there is super lag in iphone 13 pro max too? A12z is not much slower than a15