Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think they are just trying to compete with the Microsoft Surface Pro, which can be a tablet or a full fledged PC. A Surface Pro is a decent device (depending on the task) and I think that is what Apple is trying to do here to some degree. Again just my opinion, as Apple doesn't really have a device that competes with a Surface Pro. I used my Surface Pro the entire time during lock down. Connected to a docking station with external displays and a mouse and keyboard, un docked it when I did have to leave and used it like a laptop and occasionally used it as a tablet for something quick. I still use it to this day when I need to work from home or travel for work and it is still a great lightweight device.
 
Can't wait for a jailbreak to enable it on previous gen ipad Pros. Then we can see if Apple's claim is valid or not.
 
By disassembling the iOS 16 beta I was able to locate the flag that controls Stage Manager's legacy support. The name of the internal variable is "More$ForApple.IfClear.5"
The code should have been littered with hundreds or thousands of internal variables named "More$ForApple.xxxxx" in there, I guess. One could easily get confused. /s
 
I sure hope they don’t extend Stage Manager to older iPads. I want a new one and this is just enough to push my ‘should I? shouldn’t I?’ over the top. It’s all about me, don’t you know?
Exactly, how I feel. /s
Truth to be told, I needed a laptop a couple of years ago and for some reason I held off buying one. I saw the introduction of M1 and immediately bought it, even though it was way costlier than what I usually spend on my laptops as I was a Windows guy through and through for a long time.
I have held of buying an iPad and iPhone too. Looks like it has paid off as I will be getting one with M1 or better and an iPhone once alternate stores/side loading are allowed. That would be perfect timing.
 
I hope that someone gets this mod working, and then hopefully if Apple's claims are found to be true this controversy can be put to rest.
Problem is, they will say when it works poorly. That Apple didn't optimize it enough. Or they should have spent more time to make it work right. And That it can work with an A4 Chip, and on and on.
If Apple are caught out then at least we know where we stand I suppose. Each individual can then decide for themselves whether they want to continue to supporting the iPad/Apple or not.
Some people like conspiracies. They will believe whatever they want to believe. True or not.
 
I don't need all the official bells & whistles of a full Stage Manager experience...if i can just get an external display that doesn't have the black bars and allows for one extra app with my 2018 iPad Pro, I'd be good with that. Not sure why the feature can't simply be scaled down/up based on the device's capability, instead of pre-M1 iPads being stuck with a horrible mirroring-with-black-bars-only experience. :/

I get it that a line has to eventually be drawn somewhere, but it just seems this is very all-or-nothing with this particular feature. At least improve the existing external display capability for us "old" iPads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma
Rather than waiting for multitasking on my non-M1 iPad Pro, I’ll be switching back to Mac OS with an M2 Air next month. iPad apps all seem to be 3rd class behind web interface and iPhone apps. I don’t use the touchscreen as much as most people do and I hardly ever take it off the Magic Keyboard. The screens get bigger and I become more of a klutz so I would just end up cracking another expensive iPad Pro screen, anyway. I still love ya iOS…on my iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chad Johnson
My god do people have nothing better to do than to manufacture a stupid controversy? Stage Manager isn't the end all iPad feature.
Well said.

I have zero intention to move my apps is huge oversized tiles that take up too much screen estate. Also, my needs vary all the time. I never put iPad apps in split mode because it’s annoying. This will not change this.

Just give me free floating app windows and call it a day.
 
Why do you think they’re being dishonest in the first place?

When asked they simply said- we don’t think it works up to our standards on anything less than m1. They didn’t say it didn’t work. They simply alluded to it being a feature for the most modern cpu architecture in the iPad line.

I mean, that’s it. There no dishonesty there, and as far as everyone knows, their reply was an honest one.

Maybe YOU think something else, but that doesn’t make them liars with anything they have said.
Right, but the original concept came from Shrinkydink, which was written in 2006 for Macbook Pro's that had 2gb of RAM. That's why we think they're being dishonest. Not because the way that it's written now, doesn't require an M1*, but because they could - and did - write it a decade and a half ago to run on computers that were far less capable than the A14 and A15 chips that they're selling today, that are deemed "too slow".

It's especially infuriating when every product announcement has Apple saying how much faster their newest A-series chip is compared to the average Intel laptop chip... and then to do a 180 and say "yeah, turns out that what we wrote is so resource intensive even a midrange PC can't run it". If that's the truth, just what are their software engineers doing over there?

* Although that they support the M1 with 64gb and no swap file is... interesting, since it's only 6% faster than the iPad Mini 6 with an A15 chip, and otherwise has the same storage size and non-swap-file.
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma
Mac mini arm dev kit ran an a12z chip and was able to run full Mac OS fine. Seems weird even newer processors can’t handle apps in window mode. Be interesting to see how this performs if someone manages to enable it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chad Johnson
A UK consumer champion has launched a £750 million ($907 million) legal claim against Apple over the 2017 iPhone throttling controversy that saw a software update effectively slow down older devices (via The Guardian).

I feel there is a lawsuit potential here - they are blaming the M! chip but we know the iPad 2020 is capable of competing against PC laptops ( faster than, they say) but I suspect it is code to try to force users to upgrade - this is what the real controversy is about - throttling iPad Pro 2020's and we are not buying their explanation anymore in light of their prior nefarious activity.
Jesus.
Right, but the original concept came from Shrinkydink, which was written in 2006 for Macbook Pro's that had 2gb of RAM. That's why we think they're being dishonest. Not because the way that it's written now, doesn't require an M1*, but because they could - and did - write it a decade and a half ago to run on computers that were far less capable than the A14 and A15 chips that they're selling today, that are deemed "too slow".

It's especially infuriating when every product announcement has Apple saying how much faster their newest A-series chip is compared to the average Intel laptop chip... and then to do a 180 and say "yeah, turns out that what we wrote is so resource intensive even a midrange PC can't run it". If that's the truth, just what are their software engineers doing over there?

* Although that they support the M1 with 64gb and no swap file is... interesting, since it's only 6% faster than the iPad Mini 6 with an A15 chip, and otherwise has the same storage size and non-swap-file.
But a mac, regardless of chipset, for the past several decades has been able to multitask as par for the course. Thats how they work. The iPad hasn’t. It’s the opposite of how they work. They are specifically designed to not work like that. Everything is in a sandbox.

If you can’t see the difference with what’s been achieved here, then I don’t know what.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rettro
So why are we here arguing?

My belief is that it's because each of us has some narrative about why Apple has made this choice and - by god - each of us wants to be right. It just feels sooooo good to win an argument.

I think people are trying to figure out what's up with the future of Apple hardware support, and specifically ipad pro support.

It's important because mac buyers are looking at spending more for a longer use machine.
 
Or maybe it's exactly the opposite, a simple ploy to get us to think they tested it but actually they didn't but just put it there to mislead us?
It doesn’t matter if they tested the current build or not. If they wanted they could’ve made an Optimized version that could run on, you know, the brand new iPad they released a few months ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thejadedmonkey
Step 1) Public outcry
Step 2) Apple eventually caves to pressure
Step 3) Another public outcry because Apple was right, the older iPP's can't handle it
Step 4) Profit?
 
I think we all know why they disabled it on legacy iPads. And why they solder the RAM and SSDs in their computers.
Yes! and we also know why they make their own software, hardware, processors, movies, tv shows, credit card, and music streaming... 🤣😉
 
There's a war in Ukraine. We're coming out of a global pandemic. Democracy is being threatened. But what people are really upset about is the lack of Stage Manager on older iPads. How about we improve our perspective, and put this first world problem to rest.
 
There's a war in Ukraine. We're coming out of a global pandemic. Democracy is being threatened. But what people are really upset about is the lack of Stage Manager on older iPads. How about we improve our perspective, and put this first world problem to rest.
Fair enough. Not really the same conversation though.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.