I’m almost in complete agreement with you. On one hand if it did stutter and lag they would be accused of purposely slowing the machine down to get people to upgrade. On the other hand, the last 4 or so non-m1 versions of the iPads used virtual memory using the ssd. I’m a little skeptical how fast that has to be and maybe even a demo of it on a device like that would help.
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 Tested Stage Manager on iPads Without M1 Chip and Wasn't Satisfied
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It simply shows that Apple’s level of “satisfaction” for smooth operation is really a weak excuse. Mission control on Intel macs with integrated graphics and multiple monitors can be quite choppy.
Apple should’ve just said nothing. The fact they kept digging this is just weird and only opened more scrutiny to themselves.
Air 5 doesn't have memory swapping but Apple let it runs stage manager, and actually it turns out so smooth! Apple proved all technical requirements they mentioned is not real, no point to even talk about these so called technical requirements. This is just pure Apple $$$ decision. Pro and Air are most expensive ipad in Apple store now then M1 becomes the excuse.
For the curious, this was covered ad nauseum on MBW yesterday... enjoy!
https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly/episodes/822?autostart=false
https://twit.tv/shows/macbreak-weekly/episodes/822?autostart=false
Apple lists like four five reasons. Macrumors hyperfocuses on one reason.
iPad Air 5 64GB model will not include iPadOS 16 virtual memory swap feature
Will still have the Stage Manager feature. Apple recently announced two new features coming to the M1 iPads with the upcoming iPadOS 16 update. This...
So the feature can work on the base ipad Air 5 without virtual swap memory.
Gee Apple, how far would you want to dig this hole?
You missed my point. The pont was, Apple said nothing on why they stopped supporting iphone 7 on ios16, yet they spent so much time trying to make up excuses for stage manager availability. Why? Apple should've just stayed silent like usual, and none of this scrutiny would've happened.
Look at OS/2 on say a 486 Intel computer dealing with all sorts of software running DOS, earlier Win32 and native apps with great precision and the ability for some software to bypass OS/2 and directly talk to hardware when required. Amazing things were done and all "primitive" by today's standards. As you speak of these large files and imply those systems could not handle them (we agree) then we might assume that what those systems could do, then today's system would find them to be easily done. - Thus the discussion on some facets of the new Apple OS features. We have seen some very strange messages come out of Apple - one suggesting the feature Stage Manager requires a certain swap memory only found with their M chips yet they mentioned testing Stage Manger on non-M chip systems and they felt it was not up to par or their standards. So, what about that swap memory unless the software was written at some level explicit to the hardware. Might also ask about, if I recall correctly, one of the lower-end iPads with an M chip that doesn't have that swap memory. As this is a casual discussion here, I would say I would much rather see Apple simply say that they the best showing of this feature is by optimizing for the M chip architecture and that would be okay. By opening the doors and noting it runs on non-M chips systems, there is room for discussion. I would (again casual talk here) rather see certain features treated as basic and advanced features. Run Stage Manager on at least 2020 iPad Pro and perhaps with limitations such as playback on monitors that are only 4 or 5 k and not 6k (maybe just 4k) ... since they are doing 4 and 4 of applications, give full benefit to 3 and 3...etc. I know that crossing over to new tech (M chips) can be difficult, some choices Apple has made will of course have many (of us) showing a negative view of their decisions respectively.
Btw, you may be surprised how well some of those old machines did with applications engaging vector graphics and mapping for raster.
Well alas, I do recall memory managers, applications written to still function when certain requests were slow or not met and so on. I really do have a hard time believing Apple is doing as you are saying. I merely have to look at my own system to see how they fully ignore what you mention. I have so little open now yet if I go to one of my photo apps to do some light to moderate work, the app does stall out a bit until I flush the memory. Worst offenders - browsers for hogging up memory as Apple makes no effort to auto or allow us to limit how pages exhaust RAM.
Hans1972, consider the other options - take Stage Manager and divide it into standard and advanced features. Provide standards features and M forward gets the advanced features. Standard might be 3+3 apps instead of 4+4 apps or perhaps instead of 4k,5k and 6k output for monitors, just 4k (maybe 5k). Anything beyond that would require an M chip as the software simply performs (as written) better or better can exploit M chips and the board architecture. Hopefully we are keeping this conversation as casual discussion.
Think about all the things we could do twenty years ago on hardware far larger and far less capable than what's in a skinny iPad, yet for some reason we're "limited by hardware" now. It's a farce. Lazy devs and greedy companies.
They aren’t really digging any holes. They’re being asked in interviews, and answering the question.
These forum responses are digging the holes for Apple and then blaming Apple.
They just stated it was a sub par experience for what they wanted on anything less than M1.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
Base Ipad Air 5 doesn't get virtual swap memory feature, but can still do stage manager. So how do you explain that?
They are digging holes by making up "technical" excuses. They should've stayed silent like usual and said nothing. Just let it be, and people would've shrugged it off by now.
Some people will criticize Apple either way. If they implemented it people would be complaining Apple is causing their iPad to slow down forcing them to buy new hardware. If they don’t get the new thing Apple is putting out a new software feature forcing them to buy new hardware. 🙄
From Apple. Go look at the fine print. Virtual swap memory feature is only available on models with 256GB storage or more.
They’re being asked in Interviews. They’re answering. I don’t know what else you want.
I can’t find this info. I have looked. Care to quote your source? I’m not disbelieving you, I just like to see evidence and I can’t find where you have seen this info.
OS - iPadOS 26
iPadOS 26 delivers a fresh design, an intuitive, new windowing system, and a more helpful Apple Intelligence, so you can flow through work and play.
www.apple.com
Yep. And what you’re stating is not written.OS - iPadOS 26
iPadOS 26 delivers a fresh design, an intuitive, new windowing system, and a more helpful Apple Intelligence, so you can flow through work and play.www.apple.com
Or I missed it? People are such a holes hidden behind a keyboard.
Anyway, thanks for pointing it out. I thought I had read this elsewhere, I was trying to find it for another thread. Ta.
So, back to the earlier thread. How do you explain stage manager working on a device without swap memory capability, while at the same time pointing out lack of swap feature being one of the reasons why stage manager is not enabled on earlier devices?
Like I said, Apple should've just stayed silent instead of opening up cans of worms themselves.
I don’t care to be honest. They offer the features, not me. None of it works on my iPad anyway - yet I’ll still be able to use it come September like I can today.
My main point was that they’re being asked, at a dev conference, in an interview. So they can’t exactly stay silent.
If Apple didn't keep making up technical excuses, this probably would've been forgotten by now. They should've either stayed silent like usual, or just said something more vague, like "we want the magical experience for users to be consistent on our new line of Apple Silicon," without ever going technical about performance, RAM and swap memory. But they decided to go technical, and that's where people can latch on as technical things can (and should) be explainable with data.
The fun continues.
