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.
Craig Federighi Explains Why Apple Won't Merge iPad and Mac: 'We Don't Want to Build Sporks'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You only use one device a day? how limiting. I use my iPhone, Mac, iPad and AVP (not together lol, though sometimes two at a time) all in a day.
touch layer has nothing to do with “precision and efficiency”. It only adds more richness to mac and removes the need to buy ipad for some people.
It couldn’t have been better stated than this.
On my desktop, I don't ever want to touch the screen.
But with my Macbook Air, touch screen would be welcome, particularly when I'm using it as a media consumption device. Matter of fact, it would be really nice if iPad apps "just worked".
Ancient wisdom: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And the MacOS ain't broke. And iOS ain't broke.
I'm with Craig.
I'm with Craig.
Last edited:
Craig sure came prepared with a lot of ways to avoid saying: if iPad runs Mac apps we don’t get 30%.
How many of you owned an iPod? Where is it now? It's in your iPhone. Apple has a history of evolving products regardless of what it may or may not cannibalize if it works. All you suggesting an iPad can run Mac OS are probably right, except thermal constraints would limit the experience. Fine, you say let the user chose if they want a poor experience, except thats just not the Apple way.
Apple makes money not by artificially limiting their devices but by making the best user experience they can. There is a reason why the iPad is the best tablet out there. Why screw with that?
According to which poll?
Those people should just buy a MacBook Air IMO.
THANK YOU for clarifying that (again) and don’t you ever backtrack on that! It’s not going to quiet anyone in that camp, but it’s a really good analogy. Those people seem to not understand what makes each platform so good at what they do. The “iT’s AlL aBoUt MoNey” comment is really tiresome at this point.
Because iPod is dying product category and it has duplicated functionality as iPhone. Apple tried to keep the iPod line by introducing iPod touch, but they were too lazy to update them in the later stage and pricing was terrible.
I am sure there are tons of demand of A16 powered iPod touch for low low price of $299. But Apple just don't make them, they rather parents purchase new iPhone SE or iPhone 16e than provide cheaper iPod touch.
But that is beyond the discussion
iPad as product category is providing something in between a computer and iPhone. Apple introduced iPad this way, it was meant to replacing e-reader, providing way to browsing internet or entertainment on a bigger screen. As time progress, Apple decided to position iPad as productivity products.
I don't think Apple knows what they want to do with iPad. In one hand, Apple is trying to making iPad a productivity powerhouse by using M series chips on iPad Pro, but they are handicapping the iPad Pro with iPadOS. Therefore, we are saying iPadOS is increasingly closing to MacOS (or you can argue macOS is more iPadOS-fied)
On other hand, Apple also wants to capture the lower price segments of tablet market with 11th gen iPad.
So why not provide options for macOS runs on higher end iPad Pro and limiting iPadOS to regular iPad.
There's a saying I heard somewhere that you should listen to people who talk about their problems, but not when they talk about their desired solutions.
For example, lots of people clamoured for Apple to release a netbook. They thought they wanted a cheaper laptop when they really just wanted a cheaper means of accessing the internet. Apple's answer to that was the iPad. Users still got the basic functionality they desired, while not being bogged down by the heaviness of trying to run a desktop OS on weaker specs.
Likewise, the people wanting a headless Mac likely wanted to be able to upgrade the ram and storage on their own (thereby saving some money). Apple would go on to release the Mac Studio after Apple Silicon, thereby negating this particular benefit, but I feel it goes to show that users may not always know exactly what they want, much less be entirely honest about their vested interests.
I don't think people really want macOS on the iPad. The surface pro is a thing, and while I am sure there are some people who swear by it, the form factor never really took off and it remains a compromised form factor for most part.
Rather, like you said, they do desire more functionality on their iPad because they are interested in getting more done on it, but are also getting impatient that Apple is either taking their time to implement said features, or clearly has no intention of implementing them at all. This is their frustration showing, and I understand.
I have no solution to this, and I don't think but that macOS would make for a good user experience on an 11" iPad or even an iPad mini.
That is true, back in 2007 where netbooks are still made with 1GB of RAM, slower mechanical hard drive and Intel Atom process.
It was no longer true few years ago. You can build a pretty good netbook with Intel N100, 16GB of RAM and decent SSD. These netbook can be purchased under $400 and provide very good experiences.
So yes, netbooks was horrible back then, but now, you can build a decent netbook running desktop OS.
But we know, Apple never wants to build cheap computers. But I suppose, iPad can be a good devices for basic web browsing and entertainment devices.
But Mac Studio doesn’t offer up upgradable RAM and they surely made upgrading storage a hassle. My $200 net-top is more upgradable than Mac Studio.
This might be true before 2016, but certainly not true today.
Surface Pro was never meant to replacing traditional laptop, it is a product category for certain group of people. I have seem more Surface Pro on corporate environment, sales rep using Surface Pro. However, I do see more people carrying Surface Pro than few years ago.
I am in the camp that I rather want a comprised experience than carrying two different devices. And with Windows 11, using Surface Pro as tablet is certain doable.
Remember Apple made 11” MacBook Air, 12” MacBook and 13” MacBook Pro. It isn’t like macOS never ran on 11” screen. Both macOS and Windows adopts different screen size pretty well. And I can say this macOS runs better on 11” screen than current implementation of iPadOS 26 It is a mess to run iPadOS 26 on iPad 9.
I ran MacOS on a 10” netbook with Intel Atom and SSD upgrade. It was very usable. It was back in my “if it’s possible, I will waste my time trying” days.
Why sell one $1000 device when you can sell two $1000 devices
I just don't understand why would you give the iPad such a powerful chip if you're going to gimp it with the OS? I don't think an iPad needs to straight up run macOS, but it would be amazing to have access to a real terminal and some more powerful dev/admin tools. They gave the new iPad a proper keyboard and better trackpad so, they're warming up to how power users want to use the iPad. For frequent travelers, not having to carry an extra device would be huge. At least until they give me a Mac with cellular data like my iPad has...
Gee, then tell us, Craig, why are all the controls in macOS Tahoe huge now? MacOS uses a pointer for input, not a finger.
I understand the analogy but I don’t think it’s a good one lol. I don’t even use iPad so don’t care but I know there are lots of people who’d like that.
The quote about 'sporks' actually made me chuckle and I understand where Craig is coming from.
That said, why not make the iPad 'context based' and have two native OSs stored on the HDD ready for when:
However... there are use cases where I feel two OSs could be utilised on the same device e.g.
Personally, I'd love the opportunity to go one step further than what is provided as an example above and just have an iOS and macOS capable iPhone. That way, my phone operates as an iOS phone whenever I'm on the go but then I have a fully fledged macOS device in my pocket that gets connected to a work monitor. (Pipe-dream - absolutely but surely one can dream! )
That said, why not make the iPad 'context based' and have two native OSs stored on the HDD ready for when:
- Stand alone (Spoon)
- iPad functions as is with iPadOS, utilising all the traditional iPad apps and services as a creator/consumer wants. You sit on the couch and watch Youtube, play some Apple Arcade Games and message people.
- Connected to a Monitor/Dock (Fork)
- User could select to switch iPad over to macOS for Mx chip iPads with the iPad screen as either a virtual keyboard or additional screen (yes - a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse would be the optimum user input to compliment this). Files are shared natively through File Browser/iCloud, full macOS application support available but the user has ultimate choice of whether to use a (generally) watered down iPad app or the native macOS app.
However... there are use cases where I feel two OSs could be utilised on the same device e.g.
- User packs their iPad and boards the train
- While on the train the user watches a movie on AppleTV on the slim 12.9" screen
- User arrives at work and connects their iPad to a USB-C that has two monitors connected
- User selects macOS and their bluetooth accessories are automatically linked
- User works throughout the day on macOS if that is their preferred method of working
- User finishes work, returns home via public transport and takes home just a slim piece of glass aka the iPad and plays some mobile orientated games.
- User finishes dinner and goes to their bedroom where they connect their iPad to their monitor, chooses macOS and continues to play Assassins Creed Shadows or starts a new programming project in Terminal running python scripts.
Personally, I'd love the opportunity to go one step further than what is provided as an example above and just have an iOS and macOS capable iPhone. That way, my phone operates as an iOS phone whenever I'm on the go but then I have a fully fledged macOS device in my pocket that gets connected to a work monitor. (Pipe-dream - absolutely
but surely one can dream! )
Because I don’t want to give up storage for an OS I will never use.
I agree with Federighi on this and don’t want a spork os either. Nonsensical. However, a Foonife approach would really be a game changer. Who are these people?
Give the user the option to retain or delete the macOS instance at start up. (Then you save 5 to 10% of your HDD space depending on your storage size)