Adding user accounts immediately means you have the need for a lot more secondary storage (by the way the iPads already need this extra storage). Apple could and should address the storage issues on these devices but even if they do it is stall a cramped platform to share storae space on.
I doubt that you would need a lot more secondary storage [immediately]. As always it depends on the usage scenario, but the typical target group for iPad sharing would be relationships and families. There the additional storage would consist of the individual mails per user, a few additional apps and some bookmark and profile information. I do agree that 16GB could be a tight call and even 32GB might be insufficient, if e.g. all users would want to store huge photo libs on the device. But for the eMail, Browsing and the occasional casual game type of scenario I see no bigger problems.
After all its not long ago that Apple sold a full fledged Macbook Air with only 64GB of storage - and that machine is explicitly multi-user capable. The iPad is all about convenience, so for the average user multi-user capabilities using TouchID would be an ideal value-add. Users with higher requirements would opt for something more powerful anyway (or at least know to go for bigger storage).
How will they go about handling app data/files storage? Right now the operating system has the apps storing data within their applicaiton subdirectory. Trying to split this p into seperate and secure directories for each users is a problem.
I see no reason why Apple could not make the necessary adjustments to iOS as they did to MacOS when they introduced multi-user a long time ago. iOS is derived from MacOSX and should be sufficiently matured 7 years after first release. Its 2014 now and Programmers (should) know whats necessary to achieve a proper multi-user concept.
Backups are done cleanly in a way that supports all apps. Much of what makes ipad a great single user machine would end up boriken with support for users.
How do you figure? Did MacOS get broken after a multi-user concept was introduced?
IPad and iPhone were never meant to be a multi user device. The way it works is built around the idea of a single users.
So were home computers in the 80s and into the 90s, but they evolved and managed to do what was necessary. I see no reason that an iPad and iOS could not do this. As a side note: In my opinion the major reason for making iOS _not_ multi-user were the technological limits that applied some ten years ago when the idea was developed. Today you can cram hardware in that flat slates which outclasses desktop hardware from only a few years ago!
Why give that up just because a few people want to cram a multiuser OS onto the platform. Before answering this, consider how much instantly ends up borken with multi user support.
Done properly nearly nothing has to be broken by multi-user support (except for a short time of transition with a few teething problems). And I believe you massively underestimate how many people would gladly have multi-user support on their iPads. An iPad is all about convenience and its quite an expensive piece of hardware. From an economic point of view it makes no sense to purchase two pieces of hardware, when there is no concurrent need and the existing one is far from being loaded to its max capacity.
Would you normally lend somebody your phone to use without your oversight? This comes back to the personal aspect of an iPhone or iPad. Sharing may be a quality parents want to instill into their children but most parents understand that there are limits. iPad is simply a different device requiring a different set of rules for sharing.
Simply NO! An iPad is a modern computer with a halfway modern OS. There is no reason to differentiate between - say - a MacBook Air and an iPad here. Apart from that your comparison is flawed in the first place: Its not about lending your iDevice to someone else without oversight - that is exactly the point! People want to lend it and have the device taking care of overseeing access rights!
Why try to wedge concepts from the PC world into a device that is obviously not a PC. Lets face it you can buy a Mac Book Air for nearly the same price as a tricked out iPad and get a far better deal when it comes to supporting multiple users.
The more I read your argumentation the more it seems strange to me. Of course an iPad is obviously as good a computer as a low-end Mac mini or MacBook Air. There is absolutely no reason not to introduce multi-user offerings. Even more so, as the (cheaper!) competition seems to already have it.
It would seem to me that they bought the wrong device then or did not buy enough of them.
A little snobbish, now - arent we? Just for the record: I do own an iPad Air w/ 128GB of storage and would like to have multi-user with TouchID - would make me update to an iPad Air 2 instantly. I could easily afford to purchase another iPad as workaround, but dont see any compelling reason to do so just because Apple is too lazy to implement a proper multi-user concept. Im sure many people share this opinion.
The big problem with iPad in my experience though is that you would loose excessive amounts of space if you where to support multiple users. In the end I really don't see a way for Apple to do anything other than to support multiple storage locations (for multiple users) for things like iTunes, E-mail and the like. This would kill available storage.
I still fail to follow that argumentation chain. Perhaps _you_ store massive amounts of data on _your_ iPad and thus cant imagine ever sharing it. The _majority_ of people, however, are far from coming close to the boundaries of available storage.
If the iPad "must" be shared then obviously the wrong device was purchased.
Obvious is only that you seem to consider your use case as universally valid - which it is not. The must is probably fueled by economic considerations: It makes no sense economically to have an expensive machinery sitting around unused for long periods of time, with a sufficiently capable hardware, and not try to improve load (usage) times.