They don’t work well/at all. A good amount want you to upload the file so it can be transcoded on a remote computer (and pay a subscription for the privilege).
Last edited:
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.
Mark Gurman: Apple Exploring iPads With Larger Displays
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That’s fair. I was judging mainly by complexity of task or required computing power I guess.
Still, not being able to do lots of low-power things at once is kind of a big miss for a device as powerful as the iPad Pro.
I don’t think Apple will ever remove iOS from the iPad. Tons of people love or even need the walled garden. On the other hand Apple may at some point introduce a MacPad, accomplishing what some people are yearning for.
Agree.
Interesting. I guess it's possible that Apple may add touch and Pencil support to macOS some time in the future but I'm highly skeptical of that happening.
I don’t think I’d say that it’s a miss. There are a few, millions even, that need something more powerful than an iPad Pro. Luckily for them those things exist. But, I wouldn’t categorize “not being able to do things that most people aren’t doing, anyway” as a miss. Just the nature of these times we live in where even the lowest tech we have access to is more powerful than the person wielding it needs it to be.
No. Maybe back in the day when all Apple made was Macs and your choice was Mac or Windows. But now that there’s another non-Mac choice, that’s and the Windows folks are groups that will never see macOS as “intuitive” or “preferable” and will never want a MacPad. Those who ONLY or PRIMARILY know only macOS are the only folks that want to see a MacPad and the only thing Apple has to do to see that demand wane is wait.
Ok, it seems the iPad is not the machine that makes sense for you, but if it is twice as fast as your 10 year old Mac Pro, so is every other Apple Silicon Mac. I am unclear why you even care about it, give that a MacBook Pro or Mac mini would exactly meet your needs.
There already are macOS machines, both portable and desktop. Why does the iPad have to change so that it meets your needs and takes away for the 390+ million who are happy with it?
Again, your posts confuse me. If it meets your needs, why do you care about something new? If the iPad is twice as fast as your current machine, so is the Mac mini (as well as quieter and more power efficient) or MacBook Pro and they both already run macOS which seems to be what you want.
Yep that what I’m been telling people Steve Jobs was very anti big tablets and big phones.
Steve Jobs was very anti different sizes to choose from and different product lines.
Saying different product lines confuse people.
Just try finding the best or some what best CPU from Intel you got millions of different CPUs and Intel brings out many different i3s every year , many different i5s every year and different i7s and i9s.
Intel and AMD CPU branding is mess for the average person even tech people and way too many CPU lines.
Steve Job was about making things simple and easy.
Also people in the US seem to thing a bigger iPad is more powerful and will do more things than a smaller iPad.
And this is false it is just culture thing in the US, as it just only a bigger screen not a bigger and better CPU, bigger and better GPU, bigger and better SSD.
Than get new iPad if you can’t even play angry birds, watch youtube or run Brave with 4 tabs open or run basic note taking app or run iWorks or WPS office apps.
As other people here can run these things no problem.
Obviously not all users will want the same. With that said I bought an HP touchscreen laptop about 5 or 6 years ago. I used the touchscreen part for about 3 weeks and have barely touched it since (it’s my mothball laptop now but it aptly did the trick for years - it being a furnace not withstanding).
IME touchscreen on a laptop is a wasted feature. I bought an IPad about a year or so later (replacing a functional but otherwise horrid ultra cheap Android tablet). Apple obviously agrees with me/you that the market doesn’t favor touch. Otherwise there would be an Apple quarterly financial report line item showing revenue for the TouchBook 😀
No, Steve Jobs just wanted every product to have a reason and a clearly defined differentiating feature (or set of features).
Again, just not true. Jobs introduced the colored iMacs, he added the Cube, and other products. His requirement was that products be profitable and not have lower margins. He never wanted to chase market share at the expense of profitability.
He was also very anti-slots, anti-expansion, anti-upgradability.
I believe it all comes back to Apple’s design philosophy, which boils down to minimalism and purity in hardware design. You cut out everything not absolutely required in the design, leaving nothing standing between the user and the device.
Apple products have never been about having the most features or being the most useful, but about distilling the purest mix of form and function.
So Apple believes it’s better to have a high-capacity, monolithic phone than one with an extra feature that many people won’t care about or need, even if it’s optional.
So I think Apple made the right decision in the long run, as I find that having no removable media is less complicated for the end user, and helps perfect the design of the phone overall.
A smooth user experience requires lots of compute under the hood. Look at the iPhone for instance. They are nearly as powerful as iPads and that is required to have the compute overhead for a good experience and not to necessarily do complex tasks. Image processing on iPhone is quite compute heavy as well as complex. Apple package this into a smooth user experience requiring no hands on of knowledge.
Perhaps I am the only one that rather have a too fast computer/iPad than a computer/iPad that struggles.
If SJ thought this was the future "computer" for most people, he would also have realised that 9.7 inch is not enough for other tasks than checking the email and the web. At the time, the SoCs was not powerful enough to drive anything larger than 9.7. Now there are suitable SoCs to drive even larger displays with associated more demanding apps. We should remember that the iPad and iPhone functionality actually took off quite nicely after Forstall and Steves influence was gone.
I agree that there is a confusing mess around the 10 inch format. No clue what has happened there.
A larger screen size does not mean there is bigger and faster CPU and GPU or SSD.
Screen size does not dictate features that is US culture thing that big tablets, big desktop towers, big SUV are more powerful.
Fully agree. Size and compute/storage should not be linked.
People who keep asking for MacOS on the iPad should just use MacOS.
MacOS is more productive than being able to use touch. Touch is just an interface just like mouse and keyboard.
MacOS does not have touch interface but that's not a downside.
iPadOS does not have MacOS functionality and that's a downside.
MacOS is more productive than being able to use touch. Touch is just an interface just like mouse and keyboard.
MacOS does not have touch interface but that's not a downside.
iPadOS does not have MacOS functionality and that's a downside.
Because they don’t want to buy both.
For people with the whole ecosystem of Apple devices, iPad Pro and MacBook Pro serve different purposes.
Apple Pencil is supposed on MacOS as well though Sidecar.
Why do you want to touch the Mac screen? I just don’t get it.
MacBook displays are really fragile and thin, it wouldn’t work with touch. If it can be touched, you will end up with a Surface Book. I just don’t see the point.
You can use continuity feature to switch between devices.
It’s ok, you don't have to understand everything; just accept that some people want to do a thing you dont.
Last edited:
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I think the iPad size thing is related to Apple maximizing profits while providing lower cost devices as they progress the iPad design further forward. To be fair the MacBooks had 11", 12", 13", 15" 16", and 17".
While I think that Steve might, might have cleaned this up more already, I can also see that as long as it sells well, why not keep a product out there? Tim did do some cleanup within the good-better-best Apple paradigm (with the Pro, Air, regular lines).
All that said, I think that the Air name is the odd man out; my OCD would have had the Air as the regular iPad and the current regular would have been the SE model so we end up with iPad Pro, iPad, and iPad SE, with respective sizes within the individual categories and feature sets.