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

[Unregistered 4U]

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

I can totally understand how someone would feel that way, especially if they’re very familiar with how macOS works like the author of the article. And, I can understand how they might not find it pleasant. But, it still always comes down to “it’s not macOS”.

Which isn’t a bad thing, folks that like macOS just have to continue to use macOS. Those who don’t have deep familiarity with macOS or deep existing workflows with existing macOS apps have the flexibility to choose one or the other, and those are the customer’s Apple’s actively looking to attract.

It would be similar to someone well versed in Ableton. Other digital audio workstations have similar features and can likely produce broadly similar results, but they do it in a different way. Which means, getting deeply invested in one connects a person’s productivity to how the tool works. Using any other tool will always feel inefficient because a person will be spending so much time figuring out first “how to do” and then “how to do in a way I find most effective”. And, if Ableton is sitting over there, just WAITING to be used, they may pop back over to “get stuff done”, then may try the new DAW again… only to get stuck, frustrated and finish another project in Ableton. No other tool may ever feel as comfortable as Ableton.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Apple isn’t marketing iPad Pro as a luxury media viewer. If that’s what they think it is then they should call it iPad Edition or something.

Even if it were called iPad Edition, it’d still be a luxury media viewer that also runs apps like Final Cut Pro, Procreate and Logic Pro when not consuming media (for those folks that do). And, I don’t think it not being called “Pro” would in any way stop anyone from saying “I WANT ACCESS TO THE FILESYSTEM” because some people will always want access to the filesystem. It’s in their nature.

I’m going to watch the event again, this time not bringing my understanding of the Apple product lineup, but instead, just as someone who’s seeing it for the first time. I realize I may have been connecting this to my preconceived notions being aware of what an iPad does and they could be defining a “media viewer” far stronger than I’ve previously expected.

 

[Njiphoner]

I'll just leave this here...

I used to understand the argument for the two different devices and OS's but after experiencing the limitations and frustrations of trying to use my quite powerful M1 iPad Pro, I no longer do. They just don't want to cannibalize the two distinct profit streams and doing so, they've made my iPad Pro (that I had to rationalize purchasing at such a steep price tag) a glorified web browser 😥

 

[GUNSTAR1]

A foreshadowing that theres no MacOS or hybrid coming to the Ipad? this is the final Make-or-Break for the Ipad.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It sounds like the kind of thing Apple would have been communicating during the time leading up to Final Cut Pro X. They spoke to a FCP group and clearly communicated that they knew what the group wanted (the same thing but faster) and they were not going to do that. And, the way that eventually turned out is that there’s more users of FCPX than there ever was of 7, even at its height.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

A foreshadowing that theres no MacOS or hybrid coming to the Ipad? this is the final Make-or-Break for the Ipad.

Yes, I think this is about as clear as it can get. There will be reviewers and commentators that keep the idea alive because they need eyes driven to them for ad views and they know saying this will keep their engagement numbers high. If these same folks existed during the Apple II, they’d still be saying that while the Mac is cool, it’s far too limited compared to the Apple II. They’ve got cards in six slots with two slots open and the Mac just doesn’t have the level of flexibility that pros need!

 

[stinksroundhere]

Jobs also didn’t want the App Store on the iPhone either. He isn’t infallible.

Untrue and misconception. They kept it under wraps and secretive about it until it was ready. A store like that takes a couple of years at least to ready and they don't want to talk about it openly in front of competitors.

 

[stinksroundhere]

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

If you can tolerate a lot of nonsense from people who don't understand software engineering, hardware engineering, user friendly interfaces, app development...then go ahead and talk with them all day long if you have the time to waste.

As long as you understand that the internet is a place where people will suggest absurd things and refuse to acknowledge they are wrong. In person, one to one especially, those same people are a lot more humble and willing to listen to sense.

 

[rjjacobson]

Nobody can ever say what limits iPadOS puts on these apps. I do blame the developers because I used to be one of them. I’m retired now, but I’d been in the programming trenches for three decades. I’ve written desktop apps and mobile apps and embedded apps and have seen that touch apps are incredibly hard to write. Developers simply aren’t good at it, and I‘ve known hundreds of developers. Developers either don’t bother writing iPad apps because they’re hard or they lag behind their desktop counterparts because mouse-driven apps are so much easier to write. There are also a ton of good apps out there that take full advantage of the iPad’s capabilities. Do they all match the Mac’s capabilities? No, but the iPad can also do things Macs can’t. This is why Apple says they are complementary devices.

iPadOS doesn’t limit what apps do in any meaningful way. People who complain about this can never come up with how iPadOS supposedly limits what apps can do. The most nonsensical phrase I’ve ever heard of is, “Why put an M-series chip in an iPad when the OS can’t make full use of it?” Write an app correctly and you can use the full capabilities of the M4. There is nothing in iPadOS stopping that. There are a lot of very powerful apps on iPads. Fewer than on Mac, but still a lot. The same people who utter that phrase or something similar are the same ones who complain when Apple comes out with a feature or app that uses the unique capabilities of the M-series chip and then whine that they don’t work on their A12X or A12Z iPad. If anything about iPads limits apps, it’s because of its form factor and the touch-first aspect of a tablet, not its OS. In other words, Apple wants the iPad to be a tablet, not a desktop or laptop. Shocking, I know.

The solution is to pester the app developers. IPadOS can always use improvements (macOS isn’t exactly a panacea with its own annoying quirks), but there’s nothing inherently limiting about the OS. Two things on my wishlist are multiple audio sources simultaneously playing and the ability to eject external drives. Other than that, I can’t think of anything else I’d want as a developer or a consumer. As a developer, I have no interest whatsoever in seeing the file system in its entirety, nor do I have any desire to run Terminal, the two most often mentioned “limitations” of iPadOS, neither of which is an actual limitation.

Thanks for all your comments as a techie I am one of those limited folks who would like my few apps I use on MacBook (a M2 Pro, 16 inch MacBook Pro) to run full featured on my ipad as well (I do not necessarily need a macbook on it also but would be fun if not for limitations you well outline.

1) I would like photos on ipad to have all the controls I like on my MacBook version for stuff I do with bird and nature photos from my DSLR.

2)I would like Office Word to be as full featured as on macbook but suffice with it moving to macbook to do stuff I cannot do on iPad Pro (I have a M2 12.9 @ TB IPP which is fine see no need to go to M4).

3)I would like Moneywell app that I use as a checkbook register to have the full program on the iPad but it’s only read only copy.

4)I use Office Excel for my budget and have for years could never get the way I used it ported to numbers which is too weak to do stuff I do for my budget so a full featured Excel would be a

5) would be nice with full featured Word on the iPad Pro (Pages too minimal for my needs and I am back as emeritus paleo and geology researcher and I need office to exchanged documents with people who only use Word..

6) And finally I also have a database I use for my extensive fossil collection called Recollector and it does just what I need but the ipadOS and iPhone Os are only read and search only versions so I have to do all my new specimens only of my MacBook. My collection is being curated at the University as I am now emeritus curator at their paleo center and this database has been quite helpful. Rather than hauling my macbook there with full featured database would like it on my IPP 2TB.

So yeah as a specialized user of apple products these would be apps I would love on both platforms in full featured modes. Maybe one Day

 

[rjjacobson]

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

Wow thanks for sharing this a great list of problems with iPadOS

 

[FeliApple]

What people don't understand is that Apple sells more iPads than Macs. They do not want to cannibalise their own product with another version of the product that already exists.

Apple sees you, but you're an extreme minority.

 

[Macalicious2011]

Off course they are complementary. Why have a single do-it-all tablet when you get get power users to spend $1000 + $2000 on two devices every 3-5 years. 🤑🤑🤑🤑

 

[Dreamail]

What people don't understand is that Apple sells more iPads than Macs. They do not want to cannibalise their own product with another version of the product that already exists.

Apple sees you, but you're an extreme minority.

This is IMHO the *main* reason why Apple killed the 12" MacBook.
Despite its weaker CPU it is so much more powerful than any iPad because it has a real desktop OS and tons of connection options (albeit with dongles) - all the while being about the same size yet lighter and thinner than any iPad with magic keyboard.
iPads with keyboards are actually quite thick, bulky and heavy in comparison.
So why would you not get a 12" MacBook instead? Unless you absolutely need the touch interface or pencil option for your apps of choice.

The 12" MacBook successfully cannibalized the iPad Pro + keyboard market. So it had to be killed.

 

[Rogifan]

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

Then they should call it iPad Edition or something and clearly market it as just a luxury version of the base iPad. Forking iOS into iPad OS, calling it iPad Pro, releasing professional apps like Logic and Final Cut, bragging about productivity apps like Microsoft Office, Adobe etc coming to the platform…that to me is positioning it as a productivity device not just a luxury consumption device.

 

[Rogifan]

Even if it were called iPad Edition, it’d still be a luxury media viewer that also runs apps like Final Cut Pro, Procreate and Logic Pro when not consuming media (for those folks that do). And, I don’t think it not being called “Pro” would in any way stop anyone from saying “I WANT ACCESS TO THE FILESYSTEM” because some people will always want access to the filesystem. It’s in their nature.

I’m going to watch the event again, this time not bringing my understanding of the Apple product lineup, but instead, just as someone who’s seeing it for the first time. I realize I may have been connecting this to my preconceived notions being aware of what an iPad does and they could be defining a “media viewer” far stronger than I’ve previously expected.

As I’ve said, Apple employs a lot of smart people. They can certainly figure out a way to give power users a bit more of what they want without making iPad confusing for grandma. I use Split View all the time. I use the files app. My 83 year old mother uses her base iPad every day. She wouldn’t have a clue what Split View or the files app is and doesn’t miss them because she would have no reason to use them. I don’t buy the notion that making iPadOS a bit better for someone like Federico Viticci means making it worse for my elderly mother.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Untrue and misconception. They kept it under wraps and secretive about it until it was ready. A store like that takes a couple of years at least to ready and they don't want to talk about it openly in front of competitors.

So, I can’t remember where I read it (so may be incorrect) but I read that he thought that taking a team that
a. had pretty much done the impossible and upended the cellular phone market AND
b. were continuing to refine and improve at the OS level THEN
c. tasking them with creating an App Store, with the SDK, all of the exposed API’s and the hardening of same that would entail

would be too much to ask, even for him. It was more that the developers said they were up to the challenge and wanted to do it that he went ahead with it. Again, can’t remember where I read it and maybe it was a rose colored glasses thing written by an ex-employee, but it made sense.

 

[AlexJoda]

For her review of the new M4 iPad Pro, The Wall Street Journal's Joanna Stern spoke with Tom Boger, Apple's vice president of iPad and Mac marketing. Stern focused on comparing the iPad Pro to a MacBook, and asked some targeted questions about the way Apple views the two devices.

According to Boger, Apple sees the iPad Pro and Mac as devices that are meant to be used alongside one another. "We don't see them as competing devices," he said. "We see them as complementary devices." While the iPad is a "touch-first device," the Mac is designed for "indirect manipulation," with a mouse or keyboard, which is a point that Apple has reiterated several times over the years.

"macOS is for a very different paradigm of computing," he went on to explain after Stern asked about the possibility of running Mac apps on the iPad or a Mac with a touch screen. Boger said that many Apple customers have both devices, and use the iPad to "extend" Mac work with Continuity.

When asked if Apple would ever change its mind on a touch screen Mac, he didn't say no. "Oh, I can't say we never change our mind," he told Stern.

Stern traded her MacBook for an iPad for her review, and said that the iPad was better for portability, touch, and 5G connectivity, a feature not available on the Mac. The Mac offered superior port options (it has more than one), better software and multitasking, longer battery life, and better multi-display support.

Stern's full review and interview with Boger can be read over at The Wall Street Journal.

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

Would be great if Apple makes it at least possible to run virtual machines on iPad OS. This way we can use Parallels to run MacOS or Windows on the iPads and Apple has no problem or work to integrate anything....

 

[purplerainpurplerain]

Would be great if Apple makes it at least possible to run virtual machines on iPad OS.

Would you like some complimentary coffee with that iPad frying pan?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

As I’ve said, Apple employs a lot of smart people. They can certainly figure out a way to give power users a bit more of what they want without making iPad confusing for grandma. I use Split View all the time. I use the files app. My 83 year old mother uses her base iPad every day. She wouldn’t have a clue what Split View or the files app is and doesn’t miss them because she would have no reason to use them. I don’t buy the notion that making iPadOS a bit better for someone like Federico Viticci means making it worse for my elderly mother.

I think “giving power users” anything is something Apple’s against. FCP, trash can Mac Pro… they’ve taken a hands off approach with a particular set of power users in general because power users usually want “that thing I have today, just faster”. And, while Apple does this sometimes, they’ve also been known to excise themselves of a particularly loud set of “power users” because power users don’t want any of this silly skating to where the puck will be. They want a well defined incremental improvement that allows them to retain the intrinsic value of a prior purchase. And, there’s never enough of them to make Apple’s focus on them worth it, financially (except during the time when every useful home computer was a tower configuration of some kind… maybe).

 

[ZiBart]

Which would massively eat into Apple’s revenues, hence they don’t do it.

Obviously. But that also affirms the point that these make less sense with its current software and price points vs their own devices they are trying to protect.

 

[TimTheSheriff]

There aren’t that many people who want macOS. You’re living in a tech bubble with tech diehards who want to manipulate Terminal settings. The 99.9% of regular people like iPadOS just the way it is. They don’t want a Mac. They want the ultra portability and simplicity of iPadOS. IPadOS is just fine and doesn’t need any fundamental changes.

When I’ve surveyed people in the past, it isn’t iPadOS that people want a change to. They want to run Mac programs because they tend to be more mature than their iPad counterparts. That isn’t the OS. That’s the apps. People may ask why iPad apps (some) can run on macOS while Mac apps cannot run on iPadOS, it’s because of sandboxing. macOS supports sandboxing, but is not enforced. IPadOS requires sandboxing, which very few Mac apps support. Mac apps are allowed to range all over the file system while sandboxing prevents that and would break Mac apps. That’s why Terminal and Finder are forbidden and will never happen and why Apple threw in Stage Manager instead of Finder. Finder just isn’t possible. If Apple were to change sandboxing, it would essentially be a complete rewrite of iPadOS since that is a core security feature of their mobile OS’es. If Apple had the opportunity to redo macOS, they’d make it more like iPadOS rather than the other way around. But the horse left that barn decades ago. Rewriting macOS would break almost all existing Mac apps.

Keep in mind Macs have been around for almost four decades with macOS being around for 20 years or so. IPadOS is very new with programmers, unfamiliar with how to write touch-first apps. There’s a steep learning curve, hence the slower pace of iPad apps. It’s flat out hard to write touch programs. Stalwarts like Photoshop promised fully desktop features, but it’s been three years and counting. Final Cut Pro is still missing plugins but is slowly moving forwards. DaVinci Resolve ported all their desktop tabs but hid all but two because they aren’t sure how well they’d work in a touch environment.

So it’s not really iPadOS that people have a beef with. It’s that they own Mac programs they want to run. But consider this, people knock the MacBook Air for throttling and poor performance with high end Mac apps and consider the MacBook Air to be more of a casual consumer device. The iPad Pro is a lesser beast than even the MacBook Air with smaller battery and poorer thermals, yet people here want the iPad Pro to run software that would make an M3 Max MBP sweat. Even if it were to run macOS where Apple shockingly makes it touch-friendly (it’s not in the least), no Mac apps are touch friendly. This is the same curse that hits Surface Pros. MS has tried since Vista to make a successful hybrid and has failed. One of the big reasons is the lack of touch friendly apps. Nobody wants to be tethered to a mouse and keyboard on a tablet, because it’s no longer a tablet if you do that. So why bother making an inferior device to a MacBook Air into a MacBook Pro? It’s a recipe for disaster, which is why Apple won’t do it. They’re not stupid enough to not see a disaster in the making, just watching Microsoft flail. It’s not that they’re out of touch with the people. They know exactly what most people want. MacOS isn’t it except with a small subset of the perpetually online geeks.

You may be right, but, for those people who only want iPadOS, the iPad Air would be perfect. For those of us who want to be able to run full macOS on our iPad, it would make sense (for the consumer, anyway) for Apple to offer that as an option for iPad Pros. That and multiuser support would be great on the new iPad Pros.

 

[subjonas]

Both are thin

iPad Pro 13" = 5mm
MacBook Air 13" = 113mm
I don't know the measurement of just the MacBook bottom case that houses the chip, but it's certainly more than half of that measurement, but let's just say it's 50mm. That's still not any kind of comparison.
And very significantly, the chip in a MacBook is surrounded by aluminum plus a keyboard to draw away/vent heat. The chip in an iPad has aluminum on one side only and on the other side a large heat-producing display.
Their thermal profiles should be quite dissimilar.

edits- oops 11.3mm not 113mm lol. I knew something was way off. I haven't slept for awhile...

 

[Cirillo Gherardo]

Clearly not in touch with the people. Can’t wait for a new staff overhaul of Apple

They're 100% in touch with the people. The iPad sells $40 billion worth per year. They know exactly what they're doing. The last thing they need to do is turn it into a Mac (which would be, btw, the worst Mac in the entire lineup from a performance, thermal, I/O and battery perspective).

 

[Cirillo Gherardo]

Unpopular opinion: iPadOS has a great user interface paradigm that’s hamstrung by lack of reimagining legacy features for a touch-first environment.

This was the problem with Windows 8 as well, although given the vastness of the iPad App Store, Apple would have a much easier time resolving it.

It's not a lack of reimagining. Touch cannot do it all. Touch is not the be-all-end-all user interface. It has its place. That place is not a replacement for indirect UI on work computers.

 

[LogicalApex]

Untrue and misconception. They kept it under wraps and secretive about it until it was ready. A store like that takes a couple of years at least to ready and they don't want to talk about it openly in front of competitors.

The revolution Steve Jobs resisted: Apple's App Store marks 10 years of third-party innovation | AppleInsider

The first iPhone saw release in 2007 with a fairly barebones selection of apps, none of which were made by outside developers. That changed when Apple opened the gates to developers a year later with iPhone OS 2.0, invigorating a sector and forever changing what it meant to be an "Apple developer."

appleinsider.com