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

[Ethosik]

People are still missing the point so it again bears repeating - the 2018/2020 iPad Pros could probably run Stage Manager but the performance would be lousy because the SSDs in those iPads are 5-10x slower than those in the M1-based machines. Lower amounts of RAM = more need for virtual memory swapping. More virtual memory swapping + slower SSD = slower, laggier, stuttering performance. Apple is not saying it can’t be done, they’re saying the experience will suck and they‘re not willing to gimp the feature.

macOS has had virtual memory for years and we’ve all learned to deal with what it causes. Spinning beach balls, hanging screens, and general slowness. Apple has clearly said they don’t want that for iPad. People expect instant response time on a touch-first device.

Yep agreed. People need to remember what it was like with their first SSD. Nearly all my wait icons on Windows and beach balls on macOS were gone. Everything was so slow 25 years ago even with 7200rpm drives, not sure why people are making that an argument.

Everything is also sandboxed in iOS which I am sure adds some overhead compared to standard desktop class operating systems.

 

[Ethosik]

Paged memory support could not have just arrived in the M1 because macOS ran on the A12z on the DTK. Now, there might be other hardware and software components that enable this on the M1 iPads that aren't present on the early models, but the CPU itself should support it.

The DTK also came with 16GB of RAM compared to the 4 or 6 in the iPad. People don’t think about this it seems.

I can shove a Core i9 processor in a system with 4GB of RAM. How will my multitasking be?

 

[blackcrayon]

I won’t buy their explanation that A12X is not performant enough to handle stage manager’s simultaneous multi-window multitasking, when my Windows laptop with i7-7700HQ which is a slower CPU compared to A12X handled much more intense multitasking without breaking a sweat.

Task prioritization has been here since forever, even Windows OS or Windows programs knows to put program’s thread at higher priority when user is actively interacting with the program, and put their thread at lower priority when user isn’t actively interacting.

First make sure your windows laptop has 4 GB of RAM. Then open 8 very large apps that use >2 GB each. Then see if a sweat is broken. Bonus points for putting in an SSD that matches the A12X iPad's SSD performance.

Seeing the examples of a more limited Stage Manager for use with older recent iPads makes sense. Even if you have place some limits with the model effected, Apple needs to be expanding the Stage Manager usability, instead of producing one coded example that only fits in a specific SoC vs RAM match. Boggles the mind that a A15 could not run Stage Manger floating windows in a limited fashion in place of 2 applications side by side. I really dislike the side by side as it currently implemented, and IPadOS 16 really fails on improving it for non M1 iPads.

Of course an A15 could run Stage Manager in a "limited fashion". I think the idea here is that Apple thinks non M1s can't run the *same* features with Stage Manager, thus they don't want to implement it. I don't think anyone thinks they couldn't strip features out of it until it worked (e.g. pare it down to 3 apps maximum like slide over/split view).

 

[Eso]

Using a computer doesn't make you a software (or hardware) engineer. Driving for 30 years doesn't mean you can build a car better than, say, Toyota.

Flawed analogy. A better one is I’ve seen you run 10 mph for years. Then you buy a new pair of shoes, but now you claim that you can’t run faster than 8 mph otherwise you might twist your ankle. Either you are lying or the shoes were poorly designed.

 

[Ethosik]

People need to stop comparing this to 25 years ago. If I had an average or high system that was built 25 years ago, it won’t even be able to run Windows 10. Even if I hacked it, the amount of RAM 25 years ago will make it impossible to multitask today. Back in the day I had a high spec system with 1GB of RAM and I used Photoshop. Can I even launch photoshop today with that amount of RAM?

 

[Mtd1997]

External display support is arguably more exciting than stage manager. That is something apple could have added to older ipads too but DIDN’T. Besides better multitasking and external display support, ipadOS didn’t get any notable upgrades.

No one buys an apple device (especially an expensive iPad Pro) thinking it will get locked out of new features in less than 2 years. Obviously technology progresses and old hardware can’t keep up but external display support? WHAT A SIMPLE THING they could have included. They didn’t have to bundle that with stage manager and lock 80% of iPad users out.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Amazing how many ‘newbies’ suddenly appear on threads like this.

 

[Realityck]

Of course an A15 could run Stage Manager in a "limited fashion". I think the idea here is that Apple thinks non M1s can't run the *same* features with Stage Manager, thus they don't want to implement it. I don't think anyone thinks they couldn't strip features out of it until it worked (e.g. pare it down to 3 apps maximum like slide over/split view).

I think all this less then stellar feedback they are getting against the preliminary dev release of IPadOS 16 as far Stage Manager is constructive, hope they expand beyond the current implementation.

 

[HaddockW]

External display support is arguably more exciting than stage manager. That is something apple could have added to older ipads too but DIDN’T. Besides better multitasking and external display support, ipadOS didn’t get any notable upgrades.

No one buys an apple device (especially an expensive iPad Pro) thinking it will get locked out of new features in less than 2 years. Obviously technology progresses and old hardware can’t keep up but external display support? WHAT A SIMPLE THING they could have included. They didn’t have to bundle that with stage manager and lock 80% of iPad users out.

And the 4th gen iPad Pro can only support up to 4k/30. Not 5k, not 6k. So nothing Apple currently sells. It would be painful to watch people trying to connect to the Studio Display with their 2020 iPads and come to the conclusion it can't.

 

[HaddockW]

Yes that is exactly why ipad should be able to do it to!!!!

it is still fullscreen, which I was referring to. I never talked multitasking or demanding apps. You are wrong about iPhone the. It still has black bars like ipad.

Then it serves no purpose to support Stage Manager. Sure, just an "extended display" would be nice. But no multi-tasking. That would be 1/2 ass for sure. Who would put up with that?

 

[Sinequanon83]

What’s Pro mean to you? What’s Pro mean to Apple. To me, Pro means the top of that range for that iteration.

Just because it says Pro, it doesn’t mean you’re entitled to anything more than the software that was available when you bought it.

Why do you think you’re entitled to something different?

Pro means “last more than 2 years”? Pro means “is capable of expanding its functionality to meet professional workflows”? What you’re saying is that if I want Pro-level features in the form factor of an iPad Pro, what I need to do is sell my iPad Pro and buy an iPad Pro. Cool. I guess I should have bought an iPad Pro in the first place?

 

[hans1972]

It’s weird that every Mac I have used over the past 25 years has had no problems handling onscreen windowing.

Now all of a sudden “windowing” requires insane computing resources that my non-M1 iPad can’t deliver.

Huh.

Running memory intensive applications require more memory.

Think about all the people here complaining about Macs being sold with only 8Gb of memory saying you need at least 16Gb as standard today.

 

[hans1972]

Because some of us have been using computers for 30 years. It has been many, many years that we have been running several programs concurrently. We started doing so with computers that had single-core processors that were less than 1GHz, and with less than 500 MB of RAM.

So don’t try and tell us that several mobile apps can’t run concurrently on a device with less than an 8-core M1 with 6 GB of RAM - it’s just not reasonable.

The difference is that those other computers might be slow if you run to many applications.

I think Apple is aiming for a multi-application system where it's very difficult to slow down the system.
They won't allow you the freedom to slow down the iPad as you can on a Mac.

 

[hans1972]

Funny that iOS 16 will be supported by the 2GB RAM iPhone 8,

what if Apple said "We tested iOS 16 on 2GB and 3GB RAM iPhones but we were not satisfied, so iOS 16 will be supported only by 4GB RAM or higher iPhones"?

I have no problems with Apple not supporting all features in the newest iOS or macOS version for all supported devices.

I only expect security fixes and other serious bug fixes in new versions of OSes. Every new feature is a bonus.

 

[hans1972]

For the iPad all we want is a dynamic context-based version of macOS and its file system with every advantage of a tablet. It’s too much to ask apparently.

Apple has never provided that so people who needed this shouldn't have bought an iPad at all to cover those needs.

 

[hans1972]

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

The DTK had 16Gb of memory. And macOS is pretty easy to slow down as a user.

 

[hans1972]

If 4GB is enough for BigSur to run on an Intel hardware with multiple normal Windows and Apps, then 6GB on A12 is more than enough. Monterey with all its bells and whistles has the same requirement as Big Sur.

macOS Big Sur - Technical Specifications - Apple Support

support.apple.com

It's enough if it's acceptable that the system may become slow.

Apple wants iPad to be fast and responsive even if you have unormal applications as in multiple applications requesting 16Gb of memory.

 

[hans1972]

Let's give Apple the benefit of the doubt and assume that their specific implementation does not work on anything less than an M1.

That just means Apple either deliberately went for an implementation of a feature a lot of users have been asking for for years that does not work on the devices of the majority of users.

Absolutely. Apple deliberately didn't care about all the old iPad Pro owners! It's very Apple-like.

And people here can't accept it without becoming angry. They want Apple to care about them. Just like their mommy.

 

[sdreamer07]

all they had to do was modify external support for the older iPads to show the wallpaper instead of black bars and we’d be all happyish or allow a second app on the external display. I don’t really care for stage manager on the internal display with it being tiny, it’s the external displays is where I’d utilize it.

 

[hans1972]

Damage control continues. It doesn’t change the fact that A12Z/A12X can run it. We know it and they know we know it.

MacOS, Windows, ChromeOS, even Samsung Dex support free window size on puny aged processors while iOS requires M1 for this instantaneous app swap. Whatever.

I have saved my post messages and however many MacRumor articles are written for this subject, I’ll paste it again.

Apple hasn't said old iPads couldn't run it. They said they weren't satisfied with the experience and they won't compromise on something they want to build for the future.

The old world of non M1 iPad Pros are being left behind.

And owners of those devices can't handle it.

 

[blackcrayon]

Then it serves no purpose to support Stage Manager. Sure, just an "extended display" would be nice. But no multi-tasking. That would be 1/2 ass for sure. Who would put up with that?

Yeah I think Apple could do this, basically you'd have to allow 1 app on the iPad screen, then have up to 2 split screen apps on the external display. But it's a whole nother UI to implement with its own rules and idiosyncrasies in addition to the existing 2.

 

[hans1972]

Apple is having it both ways on talking about their hardware.

Apple told us that their 2018 chip (A12X) was so fast and capable that it didn't need much improvement in 2020 (A12Z) and now all the sudden, class leading hardware (A12Z) in 2020 can't run some seemingly minor 2022 implementation that makes the ipad a little more able to substitute for a macbook.

I think people are living in a time of reduced trust and now Apple seems to be making up stuff that doesn't seem to make sense.

Some people equates performance with CPU performance.

The problem with A12X and A12Z is not the CPU and probably not the GPU performance either. It's the RAM and the file I/O which is the problem.

 

[hans1972]

I have an A12X and it stuns me how responsive it is. I ran Fortnite, before EPIC flamed out, on it at 120fps.

So I 100% don't believe them when they say the M1 is needed.

What was the memory requirement for Fortnite on iPad?

 

[teh_hunterer]

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.

I don't know if there is a reading comprehension issue here, but:

1. I never said anything about Intel
2. Whenever we point out iPads lack the RAM you keep repeating "6GB is enough for any retail OS" ad nauseam. If that's your mantra, fine, but don't expect others to consider it an argument.
3. You don't seem to understand that good Geekbench scores doesn't magically make the NAND storage in the 2018-2020 iPad Pros to be suitable for swap files.

Anyway I have proved ipad pro 2020 which was still in Apple Store in April 2021 has enough cpu, ram, ssd speed to run full ipadOS 16. Apple just use programming to limit "pro updates" to M1 only and the real reason should be because of $$$ more profit.

You really, really haven't lol.

 

[hans1972]

Many of us are just questioning the actual reason for it and speculating that what Apple finds unacceptable, may actually be tolerable, even usable, if implemented with some constraints.

Yes, but Apple doesn't want any compromises. If you wanted to load several light memory applications it would be no problem to implement it on 4Gb memory devices.