Apple's Craig Federighi Further Explains Why Stage Manager is Only for M1 iPads

[BaltimoreMediaBlog]

Notice how conveniently the Mac question is quickly dodged using a new version of the old line, "It's a feature!"

My Mac has 64GB of RAM and 1TB of FAST NAND storage. Sorry, but I don't have to be an engineer to find my inferiority difficult to believe without some better explanation than, "The Mac already has a variety of alternatives." That's like a metaphor for , "Oh, we were just too lazy" or "Didn't you know we're throwing INTEL and you under the bus as soon as possible? DEAL WITH IT! and buy an inferior new Mac." Which begs the question, "The current/latest Mac Pro can't use Stage Manager either?" SHAMEFUL!

 

[Wildkraut]

Does your iPad have 16Gb of memory as the DTK had?

Just create a RAM-Drive and permanently occupy 10GB and see how well all still run.

 

[dumastudetto]

If Stage Manager is going to be useful for you, buy new hardware. It will easily pay for itself in productivity gains.

Expecting Apple to deliver a subpar experience of a new flagship feature to older devices is not how they operate. Apple is in the experiences business. They are driven to create the best possible experiences for all customers.

 

[BeatCrazy]

If the A12Z is capable of running full Mac OS on the dev Mac minis 2 years ago, the latest iPad mini can run this feature.

Does your iPad have 16Gb of memory as the DTK had?

Gonna need to sticky both this original argument as well as the response. Seen this about 30 times in the past week around here.

 

[subjonas]

A lot of work? Redesign? They could have just limited the number of active apps to half. And it's not just older iPads it's also current non M1 ones and probably future ones too.

I’ve found that everything is more work than outsiders assume. In my work, I’ve always found that making things simpler is often much more complicated than just removing things, so I imagine it’s the same for development. And then there is ongoing support.
And asking for iPad nothing/mini stage manager support too with even less resources is asking even more. Sure, again, it’s possible, but I just don’t see how anyone can expect/demand it.

 

[blackcrayon]

Apple PR working overtime

They have to ramp up periodically to match the Whine-osphere though.

 

[Digitalguy]

I’ve found that everything is more work than outsiders assume. In my work, I’ve always found that making things simpler is often much more complicated than just removing things, so I imagine it’s the same for development. And then there is ongoing support.
And asking for iPad nothing/mini stage manager support too with even less resources is asking even more. Sure, again, it’s possible, but I just don’t see how anyone can expect/demand it.

I can see it perfectly well, it would have been a client-friendly move to make a Lite version for other iPads with just less apps and lower max resolution (at least USB C ones). So let's agree to disagree on this point.

 

[blackcrayon]

back in iOS5 times, on WAY less capable hardware, the Jailbreak-based Quasar ran multiple programs just fine in multiwindow mode - I used it a lot on my iPad 2 (512MB RAM) and 3 (1GB RAM). That is, "multitasking / multiwindow requires a lot of hardware resources not available in older models" is simply not true. It's plain greed on Apple's part, nothing else.

And there were apps that used gigabytes of RAM too back then, right?
Sure, most apps don't now, but then if you were Apple you'd have to continually explain why iPadOS 16 on 1 year old iPads quits apps "randomly" as the system quickly runs out of RAM when people open larger apps.

 

[hans1972]

But they would not complain that It doesn't run at all which is far worse.

No, Apple is very often anti-Tennyson: 'Tis not better to have multitasked and experienced slowness than never to have multitasked at all.

 

[hans1972]

Of course it is doable. Just slower.

Come on, you know it too.

But if speed is a requirement then it's not doable.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

"We really designed Stage Manager to take full advantage [of the M1 chip]," said Federighi. "If you look at the way the apps tilt and shadow and how they animate in and out. To do that at super high frame rates, across very large displays and multiple displays, requires the peak of graphics performance that no one else can deliver."

So decorative window dressings like shadows and ephemeral animations were deemed so essential to the functionality of Stage Manager that it was worth excluding several years of recent powerful products from its use? Those and external display support couldn't have been designed as runtime-optional depending on the processing speed and memory capacity of each running unit?

We all love you Craig but this is just ridiculous.

You love Craig? Seriously? He is head of the department that should be renamed Department of Abandoned Quality Control. I not only don't love him, I wonder why he hasn't been fired years ago.

 

[Wildkraut]

But if speed is a requirement then it's not doable.

Yeah they must have been on speed when they set this requirement up.

 

[subjonas]

"What's a computer?" Definitely not something that cannot compete with one.
edit: I'm not sure what "many people buy it and are happy with it" is supposed to mean when every article about Stage Manager gets 500+ comments of people being unhappy with what they've bought

People who interpret ”what’s a computer” as Apple saying the iPad will replace your computer are allowing their own biases to infer more than is being said.
As far as unhappy comments,
1) Most consumers are not posting in forums, but of those who do, most do so to complain.
2) I see the same names posting over and over across many threads.

 

[Leon Ze Professional]

Making a PRO device less than two years old partially redundant [even though it is one feature] is not a good look, Apple!

 

[stiligFox]

Notice how conveniently the Mac question is quickly dodged using a new version of the old line, "It's a feature!"

My Mac has 64GB of RAM and 1TB of FAST NAND storage. Sorry, but I don't have to be an engineer to find my inferiority difficult to believe without some better explanation than, "The Mac already has a variety of alternatives." That's like a metaphor for , "Oh, we were just too lazy" or "Didn't you know we're throwing INTEL and you under the bus as soon as possible? DEAL WITH IT! and buy an inferior new Mac." Which begs the question, "The current/latest Mac Pro can't use Stage Manager either?" SHAMEFUL!

What do you mean? Stage Manager is coming to all Macs that support Ventura, including Intel Macs…

 

[coachgq]

Still can’t justify replacing my MBP just can’t get the same work done.

And yet I’m able to do all my work on my iPad Pro, no computer necessary. It’s a good thing there are options for all of us

 

[hans1972]

How come budget netbooks with specs so much worse are able to handle multitasking just fine? Since when did a feature that's been commonplace since 2000 suddenly become something that only the top notch hardware of 2021 is able to handle - a windowing system?

Because every other multitasking solution is capable of slowing down the system.

I think Apple wants a solution where the user can't slow down the system even if they wanted to.

 

[Neepman]

Actually, this is what you get when it’s run by a bean counter (Tim Cook). They’re driven by numbers, and in their eyes, more models = more sales. Hence the ever confusing lineup (choice of 3 chargers for the M2 Air!). They also hate product cannibalization, hence the lack of clear direction with iPad and Mac.

It took awhile but apple is almost exactly where they where when Steve Jobs came back 25 years ago. Way too many oddly overlapping products and sku's.

 

[ulkeshkosh]

Complete BS. I will never use Stage Manager because to me it's garbage, doesn't help my flow at all, and eats up valuable real estate. But the 2020 iPad Pro is plenty fast enough for any of this, or perhaps just limit what can be done for those who may want it. I mean it's our hardware, we bought it, shouldn't we be allowed to make such a choice?

And of course they set the benchmark to the future because that's how they keep getting appliance sales -- adding software features to new products that existing will never get. This isn't new for them. It's just the latest iteration.

 

[hans1972]

I think something is wrong when a 2000$ Pro tablet from 2020 that was advertised to be used as a replacement for a laptop is actually as capable as a 300$ netbook from Walmart.

You should really ask all those here who bought iPads Pro why they did it when you could get much better multi-window environments on Macs, Windows PCs, Chromebooks, and Linux PCs. And cheaper.

 

[jst_testing]

Will continue to use my iPad Pro 11" A12Z as a MacBook Air "laptop" equivalent; once that dies, will consider a true MacBook Air. Until then, that + iPad Mini 6 = bliss.

 

[hans1972]

For peoples defending Apple, they should consider that a paltry A12Z could handle the full version of MacOS without problems in the developper Mac mini they sent...

And the DTK had 16Gb of memory.

It's mostly about memory and fast I/O for swapping.

 

[subjonas]

MR users tenets:
1. Apple is guilty until proven innocent
2. Any circumstantial evidence counts as hard evidence against Apple
3. Any evidence pointing toward innocence is illegitimate nonsense
4. Withholding judgment is not allowed

 

[mariusignorello]

Keep hounding them. Same with the ******** Ventura cut offs. And I say this as a person with two M1 devices. Completely unacceptable.

Hounds and annoying people tend to get ignored.

Funny how everything is BS when you don’t agree with it huh?

Whether greedy or not, this could definitely run on older models, especially those with the newer A series chips.

Sometimes exclusive is exclusive for non-technical reasons. Those iMac exclusive wallpapers? They could run pretty well on the iPhone 3GS.

I’ll admit I was surprised that many models were left out. I just don’t like the entitled attitude I’ve seen from some commenters on here. It’s not too late for Apple to change their mind though, they’ve done it in the past.

 

[bradman83]

Because every other multitasking solution is capable of slowing down the system.

I think Apple wants a solution where the user can't slow down the system even if they wanted to.

This! This is exactly what Apple’s argument is. It’s not that it can‘t be done, it’s that we’re used to macOS freezing, giving us spinning beach balls, and otherwise slowing to a crawl when we push memory usage past the built-in RAM. Apple doesn’t want this for the iPad.