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.
All iPads iPad pro hybrid...good idea?
- Thread starter Anti-Lucifer
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think a hybrid is new device--it does not replace your ipad; it may or may not replace your laptop. I use a 13" windows tablet on my desk with a mouse and bluetooth keyboard. The tablet is set in small repositionable stand. Its an awesome workstation. When I need to draw or study math--I set the stand to about 30 degrees. When I need to do text work, I set the stand to about 60 degrees. I never use any Metro apps. I just got a surface and am now working this way mobile as well. To this forum, tablets mean consumption. But to designers and students, tablet means pen digitization and a more interactive productivity experience
Overall, this reminds me of the Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) in Star Trek the Next Generation, the one with the saucer section that separates from the engineering/battle section. I think that capability was used just a few times in the course of 178 TV episodes and 4 feature films. The saucer section was essentially dead in the water without the engineering section - a big, comfy lifeboat that depended on the kindness of the enemy for survival. The battle section was reasonably self-sufficient, which begs the question, "Why did they need the saucer section at all?"
For the purposes of this exercise, the keyboard unit = saucer section, iPad = engineering section.
The thing is, Surface Pro 2 is not a hybrid device. The only thing the keyboard section adds is the keyboard itself. It runs just one OS, it has just one microprocessor, one set of ports, one battery. This makes the keyboard a very cheap add-on, no different than the Bluetooth keyboards that work with iOS devices.
What's proposed here would have to be, as others have noted, a complete OS X laptop, lacking only the display. (It could also be considered a Mac Mini with an integral keyboard.) That's a far more expensive proposition - I'd guess it'd have to be priced somewhere in between a Mac Mini and an 11" MBA. This would be a much heavier and far more expensive combination than Surface Pro.
This could possibly appeal to people who connect their laptop to a larger monitor when they return to their desk and are OK using an iPad-sized display in the field (rather than a 13" or 15"). I don't think that's a significant portion of the population.
For the purposes of this exercise, the keyboard unit = saucer section, iPad = engineering section.
The thing is, Surface Pro 2 is not a hybrid device. The only thing the keyboard section adds is the keyboard itself. It runs just one OS, it has just one microprocessor, one set of ports, one battery. This makes the keyboard a very cheap add-on, no different than the Bluetooth keyboards that work with iOS devices.
What's proposed here would have to be, as others have noted, a complete OS X laptop, lacking only the display. (It could also be considered a Mac Mini with an integral keyboard.) That's a far more expensive proposition - I'd guess it'd have to be priced somewhere in between a Mac Mini and an 11" MBA. This would be a much heavier and far more expensive combination than Surface Pro.
This could possibly appeal to people who connect their laptop to a larger monitor when they return to their desk and are OK using an iPad-sized display in the field (rather than a 13" or 15"). I don't think that's a significant portion of the population.
I think the Surface's light keycover is plus--I never feel like I need to keep track of some orphoned headless half a laptop. There windows hybrids like this--i find it offputting.
Windows 8 is not really a single os. In fact, people never tire of deriding it as a two headed monster. It is the equivaant of osx and ios rolled into a single os. Although I prefer Windows desktop to Mac osX, windows Metro is still under developed
That depends on how you're interpreting the term "hybrid." That the Surface runs one operating system doesn't affect hybrid status, since Windows 8 is an operating system with two user interfaces ("Metro" and classic), which arguably makes it a hybrid OS. That the Surface can appear as and be used similarly to modern-day tablets, yet interface with input devices and appear as a traditional desktop system, clearly makes it a hybrid.
I know this isn't an Apple product drawing board, but I'll give my opinion anyway: what is being proposed sounds a lot clunkier than the Surface. Perhaps I'm just not envisioning it the way that others are intending.
Benchmarks show the A7 as about as powerful as a core 2 duo. That suggests that, in pure speed, the A7 could run OSX if it were complied for ARM. I think they'd use the flash storage and the ARM processor in the tablet in order to run the OS when docked to the keyboard portion. They could even add another ARM processor and some extra batteries in the keyboard part to boost speed and battery life.
Imagine a device with this form factor running OSX and iPad apps. I'd pay $1000 for this. I'm sorry, iOS on the iPad is wasted on its amazing hardware.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp99g6AsHzA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp99g6AsHzA
Don't compare what's out there with Apple, MS had a tablet years ago, 
made it work, and sold many MILLIONS!
Apple will release a PRO, and it will be done right, for me,I will stream sports to it from my TV, or ESPN app?!can't wait! and for movies! unbelievable , now figure in business use, (ie Doctors, hospitals) will happily deposit the $$$$$$
made it work, and sold many MILLIONS!Apple will release a PRO, and it will be done right, for me,I will stream sports to it from my TV, or ESPN app?!can't wait! and for movies! unbelievable , now figure in business use, (ie Doctors, hospitals)
will happily deposit the $$$$$$
An entry level MacBook Air is $1000, and an entry level iPad Air is $500. If you think a hybrid device like that combines the best of both Airs, then shouldn't you be willing to pay, oh, I don't know, at least $1200-1300 for it?
You mean Microsoft, not IBM. Unless that was intentional, as if you're saying Microsoft has become irrelevant as Apple's competition in the way IBM did. If so, very funny
You mean Microsoft, not IBM. Unless that was intentional, as if you're saying Microsoft has become irrelevant as Apple's competition in the way IBM did. If so, very funny
mrgmph.....brain slipped out of gear..
Agreed. The analogy with the Next Generation Enterprise back at post #28 best explains the problem. Remember back before netbooks and ultraportables, there was a spate of notebooks with docking stations, where the docking staton contained CD drive, extra battery, and extra ports? The idea was that when you wanted the full power of having a CD and full ports, you hooked up the docking station, and when you wanted a light portable machine, you unhooked the top section and just used that. But what actually happened was that people either kept it docked all the time because they needed the CD and the ports, or they never used the dock because it turned out they never needed the CD and ports. I think most people who think they want a hybrid need either a tablet or a laptop. They *think* that having their laptop convert into a tablet or the tablet convert into a laptop once in a while would be convenient, but most of them find that the "once in a while" never happens.
I'd like some sort of "pro" Apple tablet that ran real OS X but also ran iOS programs. What Microsoft did with Windows 8/RT is really what I wanted Apple to do clear back when the first iPad released.
I really expected a unified product like that to be most likely to come from Apple, so it shocked me when they passed on it...and Microsoft did it instead.
I really expected a unified product like that to be most likely to come from Apple, so it shocked me when they passed on it...and Microsoft did it instead.
There was a rumor (didn't last long) that apple was coming up with a system where you can connect your ipad or iphone into an apple laptop or a monitor and you would have full mac os running off the idevice.
People hated this rumor and thought it was stupid idea but I think it was interesting. So, I don't know if you remember the motorola atrix you can sort of buy a laptop where you can plug the phone in a dock and you'd have a functioning os running off the phone.
It didn't do well but I may fit the market for that type of device. Because I don't need a full sized desktop or even a laptop. I do everything on my iphone and ipad. If i can have a full functioning mac os running off my iphone or ipad into a monitor, then it would be useful to me. I'd buy a huge monitor for my home use and a laptop form for my portable use. Essentially, your idevice would be connected to a monitor and you'd be able to use full mac os from it.
So to answer OP, yes I would find that useful and would buy it.
People hated this rumor and thought it was stupid idea but I think it was interesting. So, I don't know if you remember the motorola atrix you can sort of buy a laptop where you can plug the phone in a dock and you'd have a functioning os running off the phone.
It didn't do well but I may fit the market for that type of device. Because I don't need a full sized desktop or even a laptop. I do everything on my iphone and ipad. If i can have a full functioning mac os running off my iphone or ipad into a monitor, then it would be useful to me. I'd buy a huge monitor for my home use and a laptop form for my portable use. Essentially, your idevice would be connected to a monitor and you'd be able to use full mac os from it.
So to answer OP, yes I would find that useful and would buy it.
The atrix was a neat idea that was basically just a tech demo/gimmick, but Windows 8/RT does it right. There's no reason Apple couldn't do that too, and I'd certainlly like it.
I could see an Atom or AMD based tablet that's running full OS X but also runs iOS stuff either through emulation or recompilation on Apple's part. Handle the alternate interfaces similarly to how Microsoft does it. There would have to be a huge market for that, although I suspect they'd charge more since it would cannibalize Mac sales, since it would be a Mac.
Yes, it is a compromise. But let's use the car analogy again. Some people want a commuter car but occasionally need to have a truck. Instead of buying two vehicles, they buy an SUV or a Crossover. The point is that even with the compromise, it's cheaper than buying two cars.
I regularly carry three devices and, yes, there is great synchronization with data between them using the Cloud but I don't see why I couldn't get this down to two devices. That is a reason why Phablets exist.
Yup. And arguably get the worst of both worlds.
Mediocre fuel mileage for my daily short commute to work, and I still don't have the ability to take home a full 4x8 sheet of plywood if I needed it.But of course owning my Subaru Forester is easier on my wallet than owning both a pickup truck and a subcompact commuter car.
I have a feeling Apple is gearing up to play in this space, but Apple always likes to wait and see, and then they come out with a product that is a bit out of left field compared to everything in the current market, but then manage to "change the world" with whatever they release. ("Magical", "how did we ever live without this", "why didn't we think of this before", etc.)
I tried to replace my laptop and iPad with a single device when I bought a Lenovo Yoga 11S. It lasted 2 days in my house and then I returned it, but mostly because Windows 8 was a glitchy mess, and less about the actual form factor. I think it would be great fun to have something like a 12" MacBook Air that had a touch screen which could rotate 180 degrees to become a tablet. A bit heavier than an iPad of course but given that it could run full apps like Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, etc. it would be pretty powerful.
On the other hand, iOS is getting increasingly powerful on ARM processors. The latest iPad scores similar Geekbench scores to my 2007-era MacBook Pro. So Apple's concept of a tablet that can run desktop-class apps, if indeed that is where Apple is heading, might not even be a hybrid OS X device.
Yup. And arguably get the worst of both worlds.
But of course owning my Subaru Forester is easier on my wallet than owning both a pickup truck and a subcompact commuter car.
I have a feeling Apple is gearing up to play in this space, but Apple always likes to wait and see, and then they come out with a product that is a bit out of left field compared to everything in the current market, but then manage to "change the world" with whatever they release. ("Magical", "how did we ever live without this", "why didn't we think of this before", etc.)
I tried to replace my laptop and iPad with a single device when I bought a Lenovo Yoga 11S. It lasted 2 days in my house and then I returned it, but mostly because Windows 8 was a glitchy mess, and less about the actual form factor. I think it would be great fun to have something like a 12" MacBook Air that had a touch screen which could rotate 180 degrees to become a tablet. A bit heavier than an iPad of course but given that it could run full apps like Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, etc. it would be pretty powerful.
On the other hand, iOS is getting increasingly powerful on ARM processors. The latest iPad scores similar Geekbench scores to my 2007-era MacBook Pro. So Apple's concept of a tablet that can run desktop-class apps, if indeed that is where Apple is heading, might not even be a hybrid OS X device.
The problem with the iPad is not the hardware or the apps but the limitations of iOS as a full featured productivity OS. Let me run OSX and have iPad apps run natively on an A8 alongside other (emulated?) OSX apps.
I still suspect that Apple is working on converging the two. I keep pointing to OS X's Launchpad feature and their recent sudden interest in "full screen mode" for so many of their desktop apps, like iPhoto, Safari. Fire up Launchpad, start some apps, put them into full screen mode, and swipe between them on your touchpad... it is not a far cry from operating OS X on a touch screen.
I know Tim Cook has recently said "we don't want to do that for the sake of doing that" but I suspect his words are carefully chosen, and when Apple thinks they have figured out how to do it in some way that adds more value than the other guys, they'll announce it.
I have a Surface Pro, and it is a lovely device - though sadly with me getting an iPad I rarely use it as a tablet. Still makes for a lovely ultrabook, though.
A lenovo might be, but how is Windows 8 a "glitchy mess"? In fact it's an awesome OS, and pulls off what Apple SHOULD have done with the iPad.
I still hope they do the same thing, releasing an x86 OS X tablet that also runs iOS apps. And/or build iOS app support into OS X generally.
I'd like that, though I think going the other way probably makes more sense. Use x86 and emulate ARM, or supply binaries for both like Microsoft does (and Apple has in the past).
I bought my mom a Surface 1 as a replacement for a full PC and I love the thing and it's working great for her. RT 8.1 is almost real Windows, and the Surface is an awesome piece of hardware (and RT runs circles around Android running on the same CPU/GPU, which is pathetic).
I'd love a Pro, and keep jumping around between thinking about getting a Surface Pro, an 8 or 10.8" Dell Venue Pro, or another iPad LOL
One thing I know for sure, I am DONE with Android. While I love Windows and iOS more and more the more I use 'em, I actually hate Android more the more I use it. It's slow, buggy, text selection and entry is terrible compared with Apple/Microsoft, etc. It's barely even a good ereader given (at least on my Nexus 7) the minimum brightness is too bright. Oh, and the battery life stinks too LOL
I'm honestly baffled by how anyone could like Android. It seems like amateur hour next to Apple and Microsoft.
I actually don't think Apple will merge iOS with OSX. When Schiller & Federighi were interviewed during the 30th Anniversary for the Mac, they were pretty adamant on not doing hybrid devices or slapping touch screens on Macs. I'm thinking more along the following lines;
A unification of the Cocoa runtime for Intel-based and Apple A-series of processors. This should allow for a single App Store for Mac, iPhone, iPad so developers can develop universal apps for all devices. No more paying for the same app separately for iOS and then OSX.
The iOS version of the app would be touch-optimized while the OSX version would be keyboard / mouse optimized.
And integration between apps / devices would happen through iCloud.
This is the biggest reason why I think Apple is moving its iOS devices quickly toward 64-bit - a unified app store dependant upon a 64-bit unified Cocoa code base.
And if I understand correctly, this is basically the same sort of direction MS will be going with Windows 9.
Last edited: