iPad Marketing VP: iPad and Mac are Complementary Devices, Not Competing Devices

[ZiBart]

This is probably true. I guess it's also the tech diehards who complain about a lack of productivity on the iPad. The majority of the target user doesn't want to be productive, they mostly just want to consume and maybe communicate.

Then why make / buy a Pro or even an Air iPad? The base iPad and the mini are more then capable of serving the target market to consume and communicate. All they had to do is release the base iPad in a larger screen option and call it a day. Save all the $$ from research a development on the Pro and Air. But many people are looking for a Mac touch capable computing device and/or an all in one device to replace several devices. And Apple knows this. Hence their current product strategy with the iPads. They have not figured out a way how to prevent revenue dips if they made the iPad a true laptop replacement yet. This is my opinion why i think they are half in, and make the hardware so appealing to power users while holding it back with iPasOS. They sell enough this way, while keeping laptop sales from imploding.

 

[mark-vdw]

It fascinates me that people don't just buy the product that meets their needs. Life's too short for the whinging and whining.

Sorry, I don't really understanding your argument here. I did exactly that, I bought the product that meets my needs. And on this place which is a discussion place around Apple products I am trying to share my reasons why I see iPadOS as being too limited today.

Not sure how that triggers a "whining and whining" comment. You must be so fun at parties - hope you'll forgive me for ignoring you from here on out.

 

[Alex Cai]

They just want us to buy both, not surprised at all.

 

[Adelphos33]

A lot of you are ignoring a key point. iPad OS / iOS has a huge app ecosystem for both content consumption and “work” (more business stuff) that… does not exist on MacOS. I want to access that app ecosystem even when docked on a keyboard. Some people actually need a large IOS focused device.

 

[wbeasley]

Then why make / buy a Pro or even an Air iPad? The base iPad and the mini are more then capable of serving the target market to consume and communicate. All they had to do is release the base iPad in a larger screen option and call it a day. Save all the $$ from research a development on the Pro and Air. But many people are looking for a Mac touch capable computing device and/or an all in one device to replace several devices. And Apple knows this. Hence their current product strategy with the iPads. They have not figured out a way how to prevent revenue dips if they made the iPad a true laptop replacement yet. This is my opinion why i think they are half in, and make the hardware so appealing to power users while holding it back with iPasOS. They sell enough this way, while keeping laptop sales from imploding.

But would laptop sales implode?

A Macbook Air is cheaper than an iPad Prod and keyboard.

A 15" iPad doesnt exist.

So if you need either cheap or larger, iPad wouldnt cut it for you.

It's like Surface devices. They offer smaller portable ones or regular laptops.
And compete against every other laptops out there.
Most are a lot cheaper and often better than the MS offerings.
But there are few Surface tablets competitors.

 

[mrochester]

Then why make / buy a Pro or even an Air iPad? The base iPad and the mini are more then capable of serving the target market to consume and communicate. All they had to do is release the base iPad in a larger screen option and call it a day. Save all the $$ from research a development on the Pro and Air. But many people are looking for a Mac touch capable computing device and/or an all in one device to replace several devices. And Apple knows this. Hence their current product strategy with the iPads. They have not figured out a way how to prevent revenue dips if they made the iPad a true laptop replacement yet. This is my opinion why i think they are half in, and make the hardware so appealing to power users while holding it back with iPasOS. They sell enough this way, while keeping laptop sales from imploding.

Because those people might want a better screen, better audio and Face ID.

 

[mrochester]

Sorry, I don't really understanding your argument here. I did exactly that, I bought the product that meets my needs. And on this place which is a discussion place around Apple products I am trying to share my reasons why I see iPadOS as being too limited today.

Not sure how that triggers a "whining and whining" comment. You must be so fun at parties - hope you'll forgive me for ignoring you from here on out.

I'm not arguing with you. I am making the observation that some people refuse to just buy the product that meets their needs as opposed to whinging and whining that a product that doesn't meet their needs, doesn't meet their needs.

 

[tobybrut]

I've never understood why Apple hasnt allowed multiple User Accounts on an iPad.
Sure it wouldnt be hard - MacOS does it - and either your face or finger boots into your data.

This is one thing I’ve never heard any Apple representative speak about, unlike with macOS on an iPad, where I’ve heard numerous Apple representatives say how bad an idea that was. Since there are a lot of families that have a “family iPad”, I’d have thought this would be high on Apple’s list. It wouldn’t affect me, since people in my family use their iPads so much it wouldn’t make sense to share. But for others, this would make a lot of sense.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

While I agree that there is no end to demands, I don't think that's the whole truth.

I suggest reading this post by Federico Viticci from Macstories.

Federico has spent the last 12 years working primarily on an iPad (he loves the iPad) on the many actual, concrete reasons the iPad is being held back.

Not an iPad Pro Review: Why iPadOS Still Doesn’t Get the Basics Right

Let me cut to the chase: sadly, I don’t have a new iPad Pro to review today on MacStories. I was able to try one in London last week, and, as I wrote, I came away impressed with the hardware. However, I didn’t get a chance to use a new iPad Pro over the past

www.macstories.net

It just comes down to “I want macOS” though. I started reading some of what was “missing” and one thing was TextEdit… as if Notes doesn’t exist. And Preview… when PDF viewing is built into the OS. It’s like he made less than zero effort to even understand iPadOS.

“It’s got an Apple logo on it, so it should work like this other thing that has an Apple logo on it,” and I figured if that’s what they’re starting with, no point continuing as it’s only going to go downhill from there.

 

[mrochester]

This is one thing I’ve never heard any Apple representative speak about, unlike with macOS on an iPad, where I’ve heard numerous Apple representatives say how bad an idea that was. Since there are a lot of families that have a “family iPad”, I’d have thought this would be high on Apple’s list. It wouldn’t affect me, since people in my family use their iPads so much it wouldn’t make sense to share. But for others, this would make a lot of sense.

I doubt Apple wants to encourage people to use the iPad in that way.

From Apple's perspective nothing is lost by NOT including the feature, but including the feature would almost certainly lose them sales. So it won't happen.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

A simple question - is there any reason why an iPad Pro with an M4 chip couldn't be capable of running both iOS and MacOS? I think the top of the line M4 iPad, fully loaded, is around $3000. For that kind of money, I'd want an iPad Pro that switches to MacOs when connected to a magic keyboard. You get the best of both worlds. An iPad AND a MacBook Pro.

The biggest reason is anything running iPadOS is going to be locked down. Then, a macOS locked down like it would have to be to run on a system that also has iPadOS would be virtually worthless as the OS and apps require levels of access that’s not allowed on a system with iPadOS running on it (no traipsing through the filesystem willy nilly, no installing apps outside the App Store, etc.)

 

[jouster]

[…]

If you want an all in one, I suggest you have a look at a surface pro. It’s the best option available but it’s not a great tablet or a great laptop.

Indeed. It is a mediocre compromise. Both its tablet and laptop modes are suboptimal. I used one for many years and I believe the dual-device solution Apple prefers is superior and does not require spending multiple thousand dollars as some on this thread seem to believe. My implementation cost $899 and $349.

 

[tobybrut]

But would laptop sales implode?

No, the Mac would thrive. iPads would die. The reasoning is that developers, given a choice of developing a separate app for Mac and a separate app for the iPadOS part while the iPad can also run the Mac app, would stop any and all development of iPad apps entirely. It’s uneconomical to develop both when one would suffice.

That would force iPad users to either not have future apps or would force them to use a touch-unfriendly environment to run those Mac apps on their iPad. There would be zero reason for an iPad to exist anymore. Since most non-geeks actually like iPadOS and wouldn’t want to have macOS on their iPads, they’d stop buying them, leaving only the niche hybrid users to buy an ever-diminishing product. In the end, Apple would just discontinue the iPad after sales collapse since the iPad wouldn’t be an iPad anymore.

As I mentioned earlier, if hybrids were a panacea, Microsoft would dominate the tablet space. They don’t because the Surface Pro line stinks despite having every application under the sun. Hybrids demand compromise and that’s why Surface Pros are bad. I know. I bought one. It sucked. At the time I thought hybrids would be awesome and I’d have supported the idea of macOS on iPads. That experience drastically changed my mind. I gave it to my son, who used it for less than a month before he went out and bought a Windows laptop. He thought it was pretty bad, too, and would rather spend $1600 on a laptop than use a device I gave him for free.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It's not just a case of allowing MacOS to run on an iPad, it's all the extra engineering and cost that would have to go in to allow that to happen. Apple would still have the cost of developing and maintaining iPadOS, and a new additional cost of developing and maintaining MacOS for iPad. This would eat into the margin they earn on the iPad and reduce revenue.

And that’s before taking into account that, in ANY of this, developers have to be front and center.

A: “Hey, so you’ve got this app running on the iPad, when it switches modes we want you to gracefully switch to and handle a macOS interface.”
D: “I don’t currently have any macOS customers, I turned off the ability for this to run on macOS in the AppStore. I’ll just have my app quit if it happens to be running.”
A: “No, the user wouldn’t like that, they’d expect to still be able to use your app.”
D: “So, have my developers create an interface that none of my customers would ever use (again, macOS is not listed in the compatibility list on the App Store) on the off chance someone were to do that and THEN spend the ongoing dollars to troubleshoot UI issues in BOTH versions? All for no financial benefit to me? That sounds wonderful, where do I sign up?”

 

[wbeasley]

Because those people might want a better screen, better audio and Face ID.

I have a few iPads. (OK too many over the years).

FaceID or TouchID dont make much difference to me.
Both work to let you in. Quick and easy and reliable. Maybe FaceID is a bit more fussy at times...

Better audio is maybe worth it sometimes for casual use. Still dont huge bass. Not possible in thin light devices.
The sound you do get is still remarkable given the physical constraints but that's clever audio tech across many portable speakers and devices now. And four speakers pushes more air out.

The new screen sounds amazing with dual layers. But a huge dev cost and build cost.
Didnt someone say the IPP screens are about the same cost to Apple as the cheapest iPad?

Apple have always liked a Pro device and a cheaper one (or two) devices.

The design language and build quality reflect Apple values. You pick what you need and can afford.
They've avoided the fight to the bottom with cheap products some competitors throw out and make little profit on.

Keeping older tech on the product list, at cheaper prices, long after dev costs have been covered is clever buy in to the ecosystem. Eventually they fall off as newer devices fill their spots.

 

[wanha]

Use the Feedback app. You don't need to suggest features to randoms online.

but there IS a need to suggest to random people that they shouldn't discuss how to improve products online?

 

[tobybrut]

I doubt Apple wants to encourage people to use the iPad in that way.

From Apple's perspective nothing is lost by NOT including the feature, but including the feature would almost certainly lose them sales. So it won't happen.

Logically, i don’t think that would be the case. Families tend to share iPads when they can’t afford more than one. Rather than buying extra iPads, families would just log in under a family iCloud account and share that. It’s too easy to do it that way and isn’t that big of an inconvenience. Apple doesn’t lose or gain any sales either way, but they’d gain some good will by adding convenience. Since I’ve never heard them speak about it, I have no idea what their thinking is on this.

 

[mrochester]

but there IS a need to suggest to random people that they shouldn't discuss how to improve products online?

Using the feedback app is a productive use of your time. Discussing improvements with randoms online is not.

 

[mrochester]

Logically, i don’t think that would be the case. Families tend to share iPads when they can’t afford more than one. Rather than buying extra iPads, families would just log in under a family iCloud account and share that. It’s too easy to do it that way and isn’t that big of an inconvenience. Apple doesn’t lose or gain any sales either way, but they’d gain some good will by adding convenience. Since I’ve never heard them speak about it, I have no idea what their thinking is on this.

Good will doesn't result in sales (it does to an extent, but I can't see how multiple accounts on an iPad results in more sales for Apple).

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

I've never understood why Apple hasnt allowed multiple User Accounts on an iPad.
Sure it wouldnt be hard - MacOS does it - and either your face or finger boots into your data.

You can, but only for managed iPads for education and business users.

Shared iPad overview

Shared iPad allows more than one user to sign in to an iPad. The iPad must be supervised before Shared iPad can be used.

support.apple.com

Hopefully, one day they'll extend that (maybe as an extension of iCloud Family?)

 

[wbeasley]

No, the Mac would thrive. iPads would die. The reasoning is that developers, given a choice of developing a separate app for Mac and a separate app for the iPadOS part while the iPad can also run the Mac app, would stop any and all development of iPad apps entirely. It’s uneconomical to develop both when one would suffice.

That would force iPad users to either not have future apps or would force them to use a touch-unfriendly environment to run those Mac apps on their iPad. There would be zero reason for an iPad to exist anymore. Since most non-geeks actually like iPadOS and wouldn’t want to have macOS on their iPads, they’d stop buying them, leaving only the niche hybrid users to buy an ever-diminishing product. In the end, Apple would just discontinue the iPad after sales collapse since the iPad wouldn’t be an iPad anymore.

As I mentioned earlier, if hybrids were a panacea, Microsoft would dominate the tablet space. They don’t because the Surface Pro line stinks despite having every application under the sun. Hybrids demand compromise and that’s why Surface Pros are bad. I know. I bought one. It sucked. At the time I thought hybrids would be awesome and I’d have supported the idea of macOS on iPads. That experience drastically changed my mind. I gave it to my son, who used it for less than a month before he went out and bought a Windows laptop. He thought it was pretty bad, too, and would rather spend $1600 on a laptop than use a device I gave him for free.

as many have said here, iPad use if far more than Mac use.
At least outside office hours.

many apps share code bases between iPhone, iPad and Macs.

iPads wouldnt die out. People like the form factor. They wont suddenly lug around a laptop.

And Apple doesnt have to put some MacOS on every iPad... they could restrict it to Pro devices (but you know M2 Air users will then complain...)

I too have bought and used Surface devices.
The hardware is nice but the app I had to run on it didnt resize well. The touch interface is not good. I used a mouse and keyboard. The touch failed on the lower part of the screen too. Had to use a mouse to get the cursor there. Sucked.

 

[wanha]

It just comes down to “I want macOS” though. I started reading some of what was “missing” and one thing was TextEdit… as if Notes doesn’t exist. And Preview… when PDF viewing is built into the OS. It’s like he made less than zero effort to even understand iPadOS.

“It’s got an Apple logo on it, so it should work like this other thing that has an Apple logo on it,” and I figured if that’s what they’re starting with, no point continuing as it’s only going to go downhill from there.

That's not even remotely true in my experience.

I've desperately wanted to use the iPad for productivity ever since I bought the iPad 2. I've bought multiple iPads over the years, and I've given it at least three proper goes to turn the iPad into a productivity machine instead of my laptop.

I've used bluetooth keyboards, trackpads, and mice to make it all easier. For the past year, I've had the Magic Keyboard.

And yet, the pervading feeling I have is that the iPad is great but only if you work using one app at a time.

If you just write, draw, read, or mix music, it's one heck of a nice device.

But the moment you need to start multitasking and using multiple apps, there is a sense of friction, of complicatedness and clumsiness that totally eats away at the work flow. It isn't intuitive, fast, or pleasant.

Another gripe is that most iPad apps also don't make much of use of their screen estate; they're essentially blown up iOS apps rather than macOS apps designed for a touch interface. Apple Music is a prime offender, but there are countless others.

What makes this frustrating is that Apple keeps producing awesome iPads with incredible performance, but there just doesn't seem to be many ways to make use of said performance.

In fact, apart from the size and quality of the screen, there's no noticeable difference between my 13" M2 iPad Pro and my 9.7" 6th gen iPad from three years ago.

 

[aknabi]

You’re living in a tech bubble with tech diehards who want to manipulate Terminal settings.

Ummmm didn't know that doing my invoicing, VAT filings, etc required manipulating Terminal settings... it's breeze on the Mac (timesheets, entry, etc)... it's gynmastics on an iPad that takes 3x longer...

And yeah Xcode...

You're living in fluff job bubble with manager diehards who want to avoid doing any serious work

 

[wanha]

Using the feedback app is a productive use of your time. Discussing improvements with randoms online is not.

but telling people that it's not productive to discuss things online IS a productive use of one's time?

 

[tobybrut]

Good will doesn't result in sales (it does to an extent, but I can't see how multiple accounts on an iPad results in more sales for Apple).

No, I said it wouldn’t cost them any sales if they implemented it. You said that they didn’t want to implement it in order to gain sales. I don’t think that would happen. Their sales would be neutral since shared iPads tend to be because families can’t or won’t afford another iPad. By not implementing multiple accounts, I don’t think Apple would gain or lose any sales at all since it’s all too easy to share a common family account. In other words, a decision either way does not impact their bottom line. So why not do it for good will purposes? Good will is a currency in itself, which may manifest in some way down the line but would not have any impact either way in the short term.