Craig Federighi Explains Why Apple Won't Merge iPad and Mac: 'We Don't Want to Build Sporks'

[Digitalguy]

In a virtual environment you are literally running two operating systems at once. Both demand memory and CPU resources just to handle background tasks.

Not really, let me explain how it works here, since I have direct experience of this specific app and platform.
When the UTM app is not used, but still open, Windows or Arm is put in standby, just like when you close the lid on a Windows on Arm device, and when you reopen it it's readily available (just like when you open the lid on Apple Silicon Macs). In the meatime it uses essentially no battery (just like my Snapdragon Surface pro which uses like 1% during the night, while my iPad uses 5-10%). Background tasks apparently use much less power and resources on Windows on Arm than on iPad when in standby...
And since Windows is idle, the cores are also idling and can be used by the iPad (which benchmarks essentially at full multicore speed while Windows is running).
Also storage and RAM are allocated dynamically. So if you allocate 100GB storage and 8GB RAM to your Windows virtual machine it will only use the actual storage used my the VM (e.g. 25GB) and the RAM currently used (e.g. 4GB).

 

[Cymru1955]

Sporks are really useful - my favourite cutlery!

 

[Shirasaki]

Good.

Just get a freaking Mac if you want a Mac. It's not hard.

Stop trying to ruin the iPad by turning it into a Mac. It's so stupid.

Good.

Just kill the macOS and force iPadOS onto everyone when the time comes.

We don’t merge, we replace macOS with iPadOS. Oh and we keep the Mac too.

 

[Shirasaki]

Craig sure came prepared with a lot of ways to avoid saying: if iPad runs Mac apps we don’t get 30%.

And I can imagine the executives inside Apple grinding their teeth hating all the people who don’t give a crap about Mac App Store despite all the perceived benefits of downloading apps from there.

 

[Shirasaki]

More importantly... stop trying to ruin the Mac by turning it into an iPad! Some of us use them for real work.

It's a computer, and people sometimes need more flexibility to do things like - install software that's not from the approved App store. Or software that's not from a person with an Apple Developer subscription. OR even build software oneself! It's not helpful when people like Federighi say things (as he has in the past) like "the Mac security model is too permissive".

Yet, each version Apple makes macOS more like iPadOS and slowly kills away advanced features without us even noticing. Dunno why Apple force the Mac user to dumb down instead of allowing the daring to navigate the OS under terminal window. Also “the Mac security model is too permissive”? Ohhh hint right there that Apple is clearly progressing to kill macOS one day. iPadOS is the way going forward.

 

[germanbeer007]

Good.

Just kill the macOS and force iPadOS onto everyone when the time comes.

We don’t merge, we replace macOS with iPadOS. Oh and we keep the Mac too.

this makes no sense.

 

[imola.zhp]

That argument may have been valid when the iPad was first released but to say the original iPad and the latest iPad Pro are the same, well, they just aren't.

I would love MacOS on an iPad.

 

[KPOM]

Not really, let me explain how it works here, since I have direct experience of this specific app and platform.
When the UTM app is not used, but still open, Windows or Arm is put in standby, just like when you close the lid on a Windows on Arm device, and when you reopen it it's readily available (just like when you open the lid on Apple Silicon Macs). In the meatime it uses essentially no battery (just like my Snapdragon Surface pro which uses like 1% during the night, while my iPad uses 5-10%). Background tasks apparently use much less power and resources on Windows on Arm than on iPad when in standby...
And since Windows is idle, the cores are also idling and can be used by the iPad (which benchmarks essentially at full multicore speed while Windows is running).
Also storage and RAM are allocated dynamically. So if you allocate 100GB storage and 8GB RAM to your Windows virtual machine it will only use the actual storage used my the VM (e.g. 25GB) and the RAM currently used (e.g. 4GB).

Maybe UTM works differently but when I run Windows in Parallels it takes up all the RAM I allocate it. That’s why I use Crossover as much as possible.

 

[Digitalguy]

Maybe UTM works differently but when I run Windows in Parallels it takes up all the RAM I allocate it. That’s why I use Crossover as much as possible.

I don't think Parallels and UTM work similarly, at least the iPad version. It maybe the fact that iPad puts apps in a deeper sleep state than what MacOS does, but it takes almost no resources when in standby and it's almost instant when you open it. It's such a shame that Apple is actively fighting virtualization on iPad.
I have to choose between keeping Windows on my iPad and giving up more recent versions of iPadOS (I can't even use external monitor support on iPadOS 15 let alone the new multitasking on my 2TB M1 iPad...)

 

[2128506]

Why wouldn’t they want the iPad to cannibalize the Mac? They cost more. Just compare the costs. An iPad Pro with the same screen size costs more than the MBA alone, never mind the additional cost of the Magic Keyboard. The 13” iPad Air plus Magic Keyboard costs more than a MBA. They also make more money from the iPad Store than they do from the Mac Store. If they want more money, THEY WANT TO CANNIBALIZE MACS WITH IPADS.

These arguments that Apple is afraid of cannibalizing their MacBook line is ridiculous when they’d make more money if the iPad did cannibalize them.

Explain why they brought the new windowing interface to the cheapest possible iPad, the $349 base iPad. If they were afraid of cannibalizing their MBA, why would they enable the feature on the base iPad and the iPad mini? That would be the dumbest decision possible since they’d lose money hand over fist if people replaced their Mac purchasing decision by buying a base iPad. Maybe there was another reason to do so?

The real explanation seems to elude people when it’s an easy answer. They’ve told us why any number of times, but people won’t believe them. Apple sees the iPad and Mac as two completely different and complementary devices that have their own strengths and weaknesses. One is touch-based first while the other is exclusively pointer-based, which makes them completely different platforms. As Craig F said, they are complementary devices with some common functionality. But neither is a replacement for the other. If I leave the house, I take my iPad with me, not my MacBook. Likewise, if I need power, I’ll use my desktop Mac Studio instead of my laptop. You use the proper tool for the proper job. That’s why Apple sells many different product lines: phone, tablet, laptop, desktop. None of them are ever intended to fully replace any of the others. If they were, they’d scrap all of their devices except iPads and just sell those. Or if they’re truly afraid of cannibalizing MacBook sales, why not scrap the iPad entirely and just sell MacBooks? Why bother expending engineering resources on so many different products when they could save a ton of money and just sell one product line?

See how these arguments about cannibalization make no sense? They are simply different products that do different things, but have a few things in common.

People obsess over the fact that some iPads have the same SoC as some Macs and that somehow makes them identical products. That’s nonsense. People don’t take into account battery sizes and thermals and primary input methods. A tiny, thin iPad gets beat by a MacBook Air with its much bigger battery and superior thermals, though neither has a fan. A computer isn’t just an SoC. Nobody wants to replace their iPad with their iPhone because they are so different even though iPhones run the same SoC’s as some iPads. Why would anyone want to replace their Mac with their iPad when they are so different in form factor, battery sizes, thermals, and input methods?

When Apple is telling us why, believe them because it makes the most sense.

Because iPadOS AppStore makes a metric crapton of money on iPad daily.

 

[cookedart]

I agree with this though. I don't get why some people are like, "just let me run MacOS on my iPad"

Okay, well, how about you just get a MacBook Air? Haha. If you want a Mac, get a Mac. Thats how I look at it.

I use my computer for drawing in my work. The iPad and it's apps are great for this, but they do not scale to the full sized apps like the desktop versions of Photoshop, Substance, and Mari. MacBooks do not have Apple Pencil support either. Apple's current solution is for users to use Sidecar, meaning you need BOTH a Mac and an IPad to get pen input on Mac OS. So using Craig's analogy, I have to buy both a spoon and fork when a different product that they do not offer, a knife, is what I actually want.

This might seem ok to you but not only is it more expensive, it requires having much more gear than is necessary. For the record, I'd be just as ok for them to add pencil support to a MacBook.

For the naysayers, I don't think most are suggesting to replace iPadOS. The suggestion is to allow booting into MacOS as an option. Do you "get it" now?

 

[tobybrut]

Because iPadOS AppStore makes a metric crapton of money on iPad daily.

Umm, you just proved my point. Your contention is that Apple crippled the iPad to keep from gutting Mac sales. My point was that Apple would want the iPad to cannibalize Mac sales because they make more money on the iPad, not just on price but on the iPad’s App Store. But since they brought the windowing features all the way down to their cheapest iPads, that totally blows the cannibalization argument out of the water because people who bought the base iPad or iPad mini would get a huge bargain and all the features the techies wanted. Apple would lose money based on that decision.

Therefore the logical conclusion is that Apple doesn’t make its product decisions based on cannibalization. They don’t care what Apple product you buy, as long as it’s an Apple product.

 

[flybynight]

But with my Macbook Air, … it would be really nice if iPad apps "just worked".

Yes, that is a very valid use case.

 

[wonderings]

It is really bizarre how Apple can't see how running a real Mac OS on the iPad and even the iPhone would actually be a revolutionary device for so many people. Imagine plugging in your iPhone or iPad into a screen and getting a true Mac OS experience, then unplugging and get the iPhone and iPad you know and love. Guess not that bizarre as it would kill a large part of their business.

 

[ultratiem]

I agree with this though. I don't get why some people are like, "just let me run MacOS on my iPad"

Okay, well, how about you just get a MacBook Air? Haha. If you want a Mac, get a Mac. Thats how I look at it.

Is this rage bait or do you truly believe, as a society, we are better off splintering a computer into 8 parts, all of which multiplies our costs by, 800%?

What is wrong with connecting my iPad to a display. Connecting a BT keyboard and mouse and having access to macOS? Why do I need to buy another device entirely when my iPad Pro comes with an M4, which is standardized across all of Apple’s devices. There are no longer any software limitations as there were 20 years ago.

Why do I need a dedicated device that fits into a pre-described category of gadgets? Maybe I just need a computer to work on. And not a desktop, or a laptop, or a tablet, etc.

It’s super sad to see people so lost on consumerism.

 

[wonderings]

Is this rage bait or do you truly believe, as a society, we are better off splintering a computer into 8 parts, all of which multiplies our costs by, 800%?

What is wrong with connecting my iPad to a display. Connecting a BT keyboard and mouse and having access to macOS? Why do I need to buy another device entirely when my iPad Pro comes with an M4, which is standardized across all of Apple’s devices. There are no longer any software limitations as there were 20 years ago.

Why do I need a dedicated device that fits into a pre-described category of gadgets? Maybe I just need a computer to work on. And not a desktop, or a laptop, or a tablet, etc.

It’s super sad to see people so lost on consumerism.

People don't seem to understand the desirability for this functionality as well as savings with having one device do it all opposed to carrying a bunch of devices. Most people who only need a device to browse the web, do email and some office work could actually get by on the power of an iPhone. This would truly be revolutionary. Think of the environmental savings in a product that size of an iPhone (not even a max iPhone). Thing of the cost savings and the practicality of a device that fits in your pocket. Of course Apple is not really for this type of thing as it would not benefit the bank account in a positive way, which is fine, they are in it to make more and more money. Just stop touting how you are really trying to make peoples lives better while saving the planet.

 

[mlayer]

People don't seem to understand the desirability for this functionality as well as savings with having one device do it all opposed to carrying a bunch of devices. Most people who only need a device to browse the web, do email and some office work could actually get by on the power of an iPhone. This would truly be revolutionary. Think of the environmental savings in a product that size of an iPhone (not even a max iPhone). Thing of the cost savings and the practicality of a device that fits in your pocket. Of course Apple is not really for this type of thing as it would not benefit the bank account in a positive way, which is fine, they are in it to make more and more money. Just stop touting how you are really trying to make peoples lives better while saving the planet.

In theory this is a great idea. What happens when a hypothetical user runs into the thermal limitations of Mac OS on an iPad when they're playing a game, editing a video, or using Logic with 100+ tracks? Then do you tell them to get a Mac? They already bought the iPad with that expectation. The current iPad Pro has a low-end SKU with only 3 power cores as opposed to 4 in the high-end and also in MacBooks. You may consider this arbitrary, but at some point the device maker has to draw a line if it's going to have multiple platforms - a dilemma that no other big tech manufacturer really has to worry about.

 

[tobybrut]

It is really bizarre how Apple can't see how running a real Mac OS on the iPad and even the iPhone would actually be a revolutionary device for so many people. Imagine plugging in your iPhone or iPad into a screen and getting a true Mac OS experience, then unplugging and get the iPhone and iPad you know and love. Guess not that bizarre as it would kill a large part of their business.

It would be revolutionary for a few, who are willing to put up with the disadvantages and complexity of macOS-like interface with touch. Your issue is that you can’t put yourself in the position of a normie rather than a techie. People buy the iPad because it’s a simple device. It responds immediately to touch input and works well with what it does. It’s an awesome consumption device and has a lot of great apps. But normies don’t want complication, which turns them off.

I’m a techie, but most of the people I know are normies. They have no interest in multi-windowing environments. One or two apps is enough. Slide Over and Split View are great and respond quite well. Everything looks well formatted. Free flowing windows that resize apps to the point where they look incredibly ugly, windows that unmaximize or move around with accidental touches is maddening. Just trying to keep two apps side-by-side in the new environment is an exercise in futility. How many of you have found one of the apps suddenly resizing for no apparent reason? It is this type of comnplexity that will drive away the normies. Under the old system, those windows do not resize unless you make them.

Normies far outnumber techies, which is why Apple has taken until now to provide this windowing system. Despite the clamor of the YouTubers, Apple knows what its customers want. Normies just don’t want it, and they make up the vast majority of iPad buyers. They’ve finally reached a point where it’s worth their time to feed the power users. Unfortunately a lot of us are stuck in our forum bubbles where everybody’s a power user, wanting Terminal, clamshell mode, unlimited windows, etc. while the average person just wants to see one or two apps at most where the windows don’t unexpectedly do things you don’t want them to do. Accidental touches are the enemies of a free flowing windowing environment.

While I do not object to putting in a multi-window environment for the tiny minority who want it (most of them seem to be YouTuber influencers), Apple made a big mistake taking away the old multitasking and leaving just a full screen mode. That might satisfy a lot of normies, but the loss of the prior multitasking can hurt iPad sales among the vast majority who have no interest in multi-window environments, but still like to run a couple of apps. Forcing those users to put up with the painful multi-windowing environment may end up hurting Apple in the long run.

 

[ultratiem]

People don't seem to understand the desirability for this functionality as well as savings with having one device do it all opposed to carrying a bunch of devices. Most people who only need a device to browse the web, do email and some office work could actually get by on the power of an iPhone. This would truly be revolutionary. Think of the environmental savings in a product that size of an iPhone (not even a max iPhone). Thing of the cost savings and the practicality of a device that fits in your pocket. Of course Apple is not really for this type of thing as it would not benefit the bank account in a positive way, which is fine, they are in it to make more and more money. Just stop touting how you are really trying to make peoples lives better while saving the planet.

You are preaching to the choir pal. Why do we even have HDMI or DP (the connector not the standard)? USBC can push the data and the power. We could technically connect our iPhone to our TV and have it be essentially a Mac mini, no power supply even required. Even light gaming is possible. 1080p at 60fps doable at the very least.

I guess the point is there are no distinct lines anymore and as Cook tries to fight it by creating new lines (4 different new iPhones 16s alone), the smart move would be to embrace it and start really pushing what’s possible. Rather than nickel and diming everyone into poverty.

 

[ultratiem]

In theory this is a great idea. What happens when a hypothetical user runs into the thermal limitations of Mac OS on an iPad when they're playing a game, editing a video, or using Logic with 100+ tracks? Then do you tell them to get a Mac? They already bought the iPad with that expectation. The current iPad Pro has a low-end SKU with only 3 power cores as opposed to 4 in the high-end and also in MacBooks. You may consider this arbitrary, but at some point the device maker has to draw a line if it's going to have multiple platforms - a dilemma that no other big tech manufacturer really has to worry about.

Is this more rage bait? What happens when a M4 Max Studio isn’t enough? Do you tell them to an Ultra? What is this logic?

If the machine throttles then it throttles. That’s how machines work. The capabilities of the base iPad are exceptionally meek in comparison to the Pro. What happens when the iPad user can’t do what they want? Do you tell them to get an iPad Pro?

Obviously no one is going to expect to run Elden Rings at 4K 120 fps off your iPhone Pro bro. Like what??? Again, people breaking their backs justifying money bro shenanigans. Also, if you think an iPhone isn’t enough, then go buy a Mac ffs. No one’s stopping you from strapping a Mac Pro to your back.

 

[groove-agent]

Runing MacOS on iPad is doable, they just have to figure out something that works. For example, why not have the UI change if connected to an external monitor?

 

[xaqt93]

Is this rage bait or do you truly believe, as a society, we are better off splintering a computer into 8 parts, all of which multiplies our costs by, 800%?

What is wrong with connecting my iPad to a display. Connecting a BT keyboard and mouse and having access to macOS? Why do I need to buy another device entirely when my iPad Pro comes with an M4, which is standardized across all of Apple’s devices. There are no longer any software limitations as there were 20 years ago.

Why do I need a dedicated device that fits into a pre-described category of gadgets? Maybe I just need a computer to work on. And not a desktop, or a laptop, or a tablet, etc.

It’s super sad to see people so lost on consumerism.

Thats the thing. You can get a full fledged MacBook Air and have the same portability as an iPad. Personally, I like the combo of the iPad, Mac and iPhone. I carry my iPad Pro on work trips and leave my MacBook Air at home. If I am going on vacation or a longer work trip (typically longer than 2 days), I'll bring my Mac with me. I use them for almost the same things, but I like option. my iPad is used for mainly consuming media and doing a light work load. my Mac is my power house. I can do things faster and I prefer the slightly bigger screen on my MacBook Air. my iPad Pro is small (I have the 11-inch) which makes it easy to do light work. But if I am working on a project in Xcode, I would hate to do that on my iPad and I would 100% get frustrated with it. But again, thats just me. I can understand why people want the merge of it all, but then why not just use your iPhone for everything? Oh wait, it's a different device. Just like the iPad is a different device compared to the Mac. They are just meant for different things. Not a one size fits all.

 

[mlayer]

Is this more rage bait? What happens when a M4 Max Studio isn’t enough? Do you tell them to an Ultra? What is this logic?

If the machine throttles then it throttles. That’s how machines work. The capabilities of the base iPad are exceptionally meek in comparison to the Pro. What happens when the iPad user can’t do what they want? Do you tell them to get an iPad Pro?

Obviously no one is going to expect to run Elden Rings at 4K 120 fps off your iPhone Pro bro. Like what??? Again, people breaking their backs justifying money bro shenanigans. Also, if you think an iPhone isn’t enough, then go buy a Mac ffs. No one’s stopping you from strapping a Mac Pro to your back.

What are you complaining about then? Apple provides a wide range of products to suit your needs. To question an overlapping use case which is still being proven out and isn't available anywhere else in the market is the height of privilege. I'm not standing up for techies like us who lurk here. I'm referring to normies like my family who might get sold a bill of goods if they don't know what or who to ask.

 

[mlayer]

Thats the thing. You can get a full fledged MacBook Air and have the same portability as an iPad. Personally, I like the combo of the iPad, Mac and iPhone. I carry my iPad Pro on work trips and leave my MacBook Air at home. If I am going on vacation or a longer work trip (typically longer than 2 days), I'll bring my Mac with me. I use them for almost the same things, but I like option. my iPad is used for mainly consuming media and doing a light work load. my Mac is my power house. I can do things faster and I prefer the slightly bigger screen on my MacBook Air. my iPad Pro is small (I have the 11-inch) which makes it easy to do light work. But if I am working on a project in Xcode, I would hate to do that on my iPad and I would 100% get frustrated with it. But again, thats just me. I can understand why people want the merge of it all, but then why not just use your iPhone for everything? Oh wait, it's a different device. Just like the iPad is a different device compared to the Mac. They are just meant for different things. Not a one size fits all.

Great points. I try to keep this stuff in perspective. My favorite old portable Mac is the 12" PowerBook G4, which when it was released in 2005 was considered sleek and innovative at 4.6 pounds. Today that's more than the combined weight of a MacBook Air, iPad 11", and an iPhone (4.4 lbs. total). All three excel in different use cases to the point where depending on location (home, a plane trip, a restaurant/bar, the office) I may deploy one or even all three. And all three have access to the same data thanks to the cloud. That flexibility is the progress I didn't think I wanted 20 years ago but fully appreciate now.

 

[ultratiem]

What are you complaining about then? Apple provides a wide range of products to suit your needs. To question an overlapping use case which is still being proven out and isn't available anywhere else in the market is the height of privilege. I'm not standing up for techies like us who lurk here. I'm referring to normies like my family who might get sold a bill of goods if they don't know what or who to ask.

One would argue they cripple nearly all their devices to sell you more hardware. Say hi to 4chan for me. Err, give them my regards.