Tim Cook Says Apple Won't Create 'Converged' Mac and iPad

[spinedoc77]

I do a lot of CAD production, spreadsheets, etc. - I'm not saying touch can't be useful in such a situation, but given the current office paradigm of sitting at a horizontal desk with vertical monitors, it's a non-starter. Given the glacial pace at which most office environments upgrade (how many still run Windows XP?) I'm not expecting that revolution to come around anytime soon.

By gaming I don't necessarily mean 'FPS'ing, but still things where you sometimes need quick and precise reactions. I used to find it impossible; now it's no sweat. I guess it's just an adaptation of having acclimated to it over 7 years. So far the worst I've gotten are sore fingertips. I suppose that beats CTS. As for the angle, it's on the MBP so it's no worse than typing. My only gripe is the "sharp" edge of the laptop - which seems to be something of a common complaint.

I have my monitors on swiveling arms, while they are not touchscreens I sometimes envision how cool it would be to work with them closer to me, angled just right. I would think something like CAD might work very well in this fashion. I know what you mean about the vertical monitor and yeah I wouldn't use a touchscreen that way either, but right under me using a finger in one hand and a stylus in the other would be nice. Of course now we are delving off track quite a bit talking about large touchscreens on swiveling arms, ahh one can dream can't they.

But a bit of a paradigm change might yield cool results. I keep my SP3 on a dock between my 2 monitors, right next to my non mouse hand. So I can reach over just a little bit and use the touchscreen to check email, scroll, open files, etc on the main screen, in essence the SP3 functions as a trackpad, it's pretty cool.

 

[ksuyen]

They will be absolutely not planning it, no interest, customers don't want it, until one day they release it all of a sudden and then it will be a magical experience, absolutely best in the market, revolutionary, life-changing, nobody has ever done this before, etc.

Not with the current technology. We should read the context carefully instead of jumping to conclusion. No one needs a touchscreen phone then. But the technology caught up and iPhone was born. At the moment, an iPad that is as powerful as QuadCore i7 turbo boost to 4GHZ, 16GB RAM DDR3, 512GB flash storage with dedicated AMD Radeon R9 M370X with 2GB of GDDR5 memory and automatic graphics switching, while still maintaining 10 hours battery, as light as 700 grams and thinner than 7mm is just impossible.

 

[dylin]

But many would like an Apple version of the Surface Pro.

Maybe, but it makes me wonder how many regular people vs. the macrumors user base would want one. It seems like its really just a niche group of people wanting it.

 

[dylin]

I don't understand why people want Apple to do a hybrid.
Heck, looking at the few people around me that have the Surface Pro, they pretty much use it as a laptop. The only reason they said they bought the surface was the portability and weight (vs traditional laptops), not because of the tablet features. Even Microsoft advertise it to be used as a laptop, a laptop where you have to pay extra for the keyboard. The Macbook can fill in that gap easily.

This as well. Most of the people that i have seen use the surface pro mostly use it as a laptop, kind of making it feel like the hybrid feature wasn't really that important in the first place. But who knows with out things turn out in the future.

 

[kalsta]

All these people crying that Apple is holding out on them, and saying Tim Cook's an idiot for not merging iOS and OS X—what are your use cases for this hybrid monster? Or are you just whinging that you don't have what you think someone else has?

I'm an avid user of both Macs and iOS devices, and I've never once looked at my Mac's screen and wished I could touch something on it. The mouse is still the best pointer devices for most tasks on a vertical screen IMO, except maybe when doing freehand drawing where a stylus would feel better. It's precise, and you don't get fatigued by having to hold your arm in the air. There are things a mouse can do that simply aren't that easy or precise to do with your chubby digits, and Mac software has always been designed to take advantage of that. This is why convergence is not a great idea. It has nothing to do with battery life or processor power.

By the way, there's a reason Microsoft stubbornly clung to this idea that one device, and one operating system, can serve both functions equally well, and it has nothing to do with usability. It's about business and marketshare. They fell so far behind in the touchscreen mobile device market that clawing back marketshare would have been an impossibly tough ask. But what they did have was the dominant marketshare in PC operating systems, and by a long way. Solution: get their windows customer base to upgrade to these hybrid devices and bingo, they're suddenly relevant again when it comes to touchscreen interfaces.

 

[spinedoc77]

All these people crying that Apple is holding out on them, and saying Tim Cook's an idiot for not merging iOS and OS X—what are your use cases for this hybrid monster? Or are you just whinging that you don't have what you think someone else has?

I'm an avid user of both Macs and iOS devices, and I've never once looked at my Mac's screen and wished I could touch something on it. The mouse is still the best pointer devices for most tasks on a vertical screen IMO, except maybe when doing freehand drawing where a stylus would feel better. It's precise, and you don't get fatigued by having to hold your arm in the air. There are things a mouse can do that simply aren't that easy or precise to do with your chubby digits, and Mac software has always been designed to take advantage of that. This is why convergence is not a great idea. It has nothing to do with battery life or processor power.

By the way, there's a reason Microsoft stubbornly clung to this idea that one device, and one operating system, can serve both functions equally well, and it has nothing to do with usability. It's about business and marketshare. They fell so far behind in the touchscreen mobile device market that clawing back marketshare would have been an impossibly tough ask. But what they did have was the dominant marketshare in PC operating systems, and by a long way. Solution: get their windows customer base to upgrade to these hybrid devices and bingo, they're suddenly relevant again when it comes to touchscreen interfaces.

I disagree, I find my finger much more accurate for the most part if the UI is geared for it. For example touching a menu list may not be more accurate than mousing that list, but windows 10 menus are finger friendly in that you keep your finger on the menu items, scroll up and down and let go when you highlight the item. I find touch a MUCH more accurate method when doing things like scrolling though webpages for example. A perfect example is pinching to zoom, to have that ability with touch is incredible when web browsing. Enlarging text I'm reading and putting sidebar ads offscreen for example, doing that with a mouse and keyboard hitting ctrl+ mouse wheel is a pain, especially when you constantly do it, and also have to adjust the screen placement. Using a mouse or trackpad is putting yourself farther away from the actual action. Hitting a link with your finger, versus moving your hand onto a mouse, positioning the mouse, and clicking, is just more intuitive.

No, convergence is a GREAT idea, it's the only idea. Of course business and marketshare has a lot to do with it, similar to how Apple strategically convinces their customers they need 2 devices so they can make twice the money. Microsoft is smart, playing on their existing userbase as everyone switches to touch/mobile based hardware.

I just think people have blinders on when it's something they don't experience, convincing themselves that they would never use something they never tried. It's like railing against using a touchscreen for a phone, but now that it's endemic it's hard to think of using a phone in any other way.

 

[Adithya007]

Remember how they used to say that the 3.5 inches for the iPhone was perfect and the 9.7 Inches for the iPad was the best.....Well, things have changed and will change too!

 

[Brandhouse]

I just don't get the idea that the iPad Pro or future iPads need to somehow replace Macs. Sure you can use Office on the iPad Pro now, but consider intensive processing programmes like Photoshop or any other Adobe product - I just cannot see how these would ever work, or could work, on an iPad. For a professional in any graphics related industry I just can't see it. However, given the iPad Pro I'm excited by the prospects that it might bring in UX and what that might mean for my workflows etc. But an iPad running OSX - I can't see how it's viable.

 

[kalsta]

I disagree, I find my finger much more accurate for the most part if the UI is geared for it…

Appreciate the thoughtful and polite reply, even though we disagree.

 

[Renzatic]

Appreciate the thoughtful and polite reply, even though we disagree.

It's hard to be mean to someone who's avatar is a cool old 8-bit Atari game.

 

[jmpnop]

I don't think this should be compared to an iOS and OS X merger of software and hardware into one device. This is not the same! At the time a lot of people didn't want larger devices, but over time we did grow a want for it. People wanted the same tablet but smaller and people wanted the same phone but larger, and some people wanted a larger tablet like myself so I now have the iPad pro.

It is much easier to do this and be successful than create an entire new product line which is a laptop and tablet in one, which perform no less than how both the MacBook Pro and iPad perform today.

iOS will gradually improve along with iCloud Drive with better cross platform features and integration. So far Apple has been doing an excellent job improving the features in iOS.

My iPad pro has already replaced my MacBook Pro. There isn't anything I really miss about my Mac. I don't burn cd's anymore, I don't use dvd's, I don't download torrents, I don't connect external drives for back ups since everything is backed up in my iCloud. I don't use flash drives to save documents, again thanks to iCloud. Most people don't need a computer running full desktop OS or applications. People are just stubborn and hate change so they cry about how much they need it. They did it with the floppy disk, optical drive, USB port things that claim they need but do not.

It looks like iOS is sufficient for your needs. But that cannot be generalized for everyone else. Online backup is not for everyone, I keep working on large files like movies, Photoshop, music collection for which I'd rather have a local copy. Moreover the main problem with iPad is the iOS. There is no way a simplistic phone OS scaled to large screens is going to replace a full-fledged desktop OS like Mac OS X / Windows. Many people require desktop OS for business, scientific, gaming, programming, film-making, music production, etc. Even for the general consumer, Mac OS X / Windows provides much more flexibility by providing a file system, superior applications like Office and being an open ecosystem - not tied to App Store / iTunes. As it stands, with the limited capability iOS is still primarily targeted for consumption and not production. It can replace Mac for people who use it for simple tasks like web browsing, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc but for anything more production oriented it starts becoming very limited. I'm very sure many people require this and I'd say all the Apple "post-pc" marketing is crap. Apple lost the PC war with Windows and its natural they'd push their mobile platform with all kinds of hyperbole. Change for the sake of it is not acceptable. Apple God Steve Jobs bashed Samsung for massive phone like the Note series, Apple fanboys were like 3.5" is absolutely perfect. Then 4" iPhone along and fanboys justified this is the new perfect size. Now, the same people that bashed Samsung for phablet, praise Apple for releasing a 5.5" iPhone. iPad Pro in that regard costing nearly as much as a Macbook doesn't come close in functionality and certainly doesn't deserve the Pro moniker in its current state. With the Surface line maturing, many people are showing interest in a well-executed convertible. Just because Apple doesn't do one, doesn't make the concept wrong.

 

[ke-iron]

It looks like iOS is sufficient for your needs. But that cannot be generalized for everyone else. Online backup is not for everyone, I keep working on large files like movies, Photoshop, music collection for which I'd rather have a local copy. Moreover the main problem with iPad is the iOS. There is no way a simplistic phone OS scaled to large screens is going to replace a full-fledged desktop OS like Mac OS X / Windows. Many people require desktop OS for business, scientific, gaming, programming, film-making, music production, etc. Even for the general consumer, Mac OS X / Windows provides much more flexibility by providing a file system, superior applications like Office and being an open ecosystem - not tied to App Store / iTunes. As it stands, with the limited capability iOS is still primarily targeted for consumption and not production. It can replace Mac for people who use it for simple tasks like web browsing, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc but for anything more production oriented it starts becoming very limited. I'm very sure many people require this and I'd say all the Apple "post-pc" marketing is crap. Apple lost the PC war with Windows and its natural they'd push their mobile platform with all kinds of hyperbole. Change for the sake of it is not acceptable. Apple God Steve Jobs bashed Samsung for massive phone like the Note series, Apple fanboys were like 3.5" is absolutely perfect. Then 4" iPhone along and fanboys justified this is the new perfect size. Now, the same people that bashed Samsung for phablet, praise Apple for releasing a 5.5" iPhone. iPad Pro in that regard costing nearly as much as a Macbook doesn't come close in functionality and certainly doesn't deserve the Pro moniker in its current state. With the Surface line maturing, many people are showing interest in a well-executed convertible. Just because Apple doesn't do one, doesn't make the concept wrong.

I don't think you've read and understood anything I've said. If you did you wouldn't have gone on this rant. Why are you replying to my post? I never said iOS was for everyone, I never said online back up was for everyone, I never said an iPad is for everyone. You're going on about production etc, I never said producers should get an iPad. I've even said that Mac and iPad shouldn't be merged, you're not even reading what I've typed. You're speeding, slow down.

 

[AlexH]

You mean a worse tablet and worse laptop all in one worse OS with less software; all in losing money for 4-5 years straight and selling less than the mac or Ipad (by far). Yeah, they sure hit a home run there with that hybrid stuff.

No, not at all. But thanks for putting words in my mouth.

I mean an iPad Pro, same dimensions, same specs. It attaches to a keyboard/trackpad module and is capable of running OS X. Detached it runs iOS like a regular iPad. Obviously there are technical issues to overcome (like ARM and OS X). Those are solvable. It's literally the same hardware and software we have now, just in a more flexible configuration. So if by a "worse tablet and worse laptop" you mean the same tablet you have now but with more software and hardware configurations open to you, then yeah, sure.

 

[MacBH928]

we might not need OS X on an iPad but we definitely want a PRO OS on the iPad, maybe not OS X but definitely not iOS. You can't make the pro-creating OS the same on the smartphone made to consume media.

Time for a new OS

 

[KohPhiPhi]

I personally do NOT want a tactile computer experience with full OS. For real productivity tasks, a mouse/trackpad is far more convenient (and accurate!) than your finger. Besides, I dont want to stretch my arm to the screen for a "click".

 

[dilbert99]

Or maybe because we don't want a Frankenstein OS that does everything but doesn't excel in anything.

Touchscreens on a laptop are a gimmick, and there hasn't been anything yet which has changed my mind on this. The Apple trackpad gestures are far quicker and more powerful for multitasking than a touchscreen could ever hope to achieve. I'm pleased Apple have the fruits (pardon the expression) not to wane to consumers' odd demand of wanting to press the odd icon on their laptop screen.

I'd love to have a touch screen on my laptop. Use it for drawing, playing the occasional game, reading in portrait mode, would save me from choosing which device to take that day. A trackpad/mouse is no good for sketching. Would save me buying two devices which is what Apple doesn't want. That and perhaps they haven't worked out how to create such a device yet in a way they like. I don't care about having iOS per se on a laptop, just the touch features added to OSX.

 

[alexgowers]

I absolutely don't want to converge the two OS into one BUT I DO want to have parity across them much more than it is.

So for example the apps on iOS can run on a mac, the OS X versions should be identical in operation much like the messages app etc.

I think having different icons goes to show the stubborn OS X team, you can merge the experience but keep the OS.

The functionality of OS X is different as you interact with keyboard and pointer so can have complex apps to do very precise things like cinema 4d etc and a lot more handles to alter parameters than on a touch device.

I do really want to see iOS and OS X get closer but in the look of apps, the photos app is a great example of what it should be like on osx.

Please apple just give us parity and use the same icons so i don't have to think about what app I'm opening!

 

[jlc1978]

let say you are correct in number. Thus, 11% (as of today forum numbers) of the folks would like to see an integrate solution, based on your numbers in this thread. There are about 96 million mac users. So Apple could potentially sell 10 plus million of these hybrids if we stay with your numbers. Apple put untold dollars into the Apple watch to sell about 4 million today. Seems like a good bet, if done correctly, Apple would make a killing at 1K plus dollars for a combo system. If I were Mr. Cook, might just be in the future. I think Apple could really make this category of system really awesome. Much better then MS could ever do. I for one think it will be a reality sooner then later.

Your analysis has one fatal flaw: the assumption that the MacRumors posters are:

a) representative of the larger population of Apple users; and,
b) a statically valid sample size to allow one to draw conclusions about the larger population

I doubt a or b is correct.

 

[niun]

I absolutely don't want to converge the two OS into one BUT I DO want to have parity across them much more than it is.

So for example the apps on iOS can run on a mac, the OS X versions should be identical in operation much like the messages app etc.

I think having different icons goes to show the stubborn OS X team, you can merge the experience but keep the OS.

The functionality of OS X is different as you interact with keyboard and pointer so can have complex apps to do very precise things like cinema 4d etc and a lot more handles to alter parameters than on a touch device.

I do really want to see iOS and OS X get closer but in the look of apps, the photos app is a great example of what it should be like on osx.

Please apple just give us parity and use the same icons so i don't have to think about what app I'm opening!

This is exactly the problem! If you go down this road you start to cannibalise OS X, removing features to make it more friendly with iOS.
Sure, use Photo's as an example. Aperture was sacrificed for that to happen.
The terrifying thought of Logic becoming more and more like Garageband and FCP becoming iMovie (actually this has already happened).
iOS is the idiot brother of OS X and to play nice one has to slow down a lot.

It's high time given the massive cash reserves and resources that Apple have to start from scratch and re-create the OS for the future. That has to be touch based and desktop. It's the way things are happening with or without Apple.

Obviously Mac Rumours isn't representative of the general consumer but if Apple were to create the Apple Pro people would buy it, love it and wonder why this wasn't done years ago.

 

[agentx]

They will be absolutely not planning it, no interest, customers don't want it, until one day they release it all of a sudden and then it will be a magical experience, absolutely best in the market, revolutionary, life-changing, nobody has ever done this before, etc.

Do you have a large blob of bluetak on your 16k Ram module so the damn thing does not crash while playing 3D monster maze?

Apple don't really listen to their customers...if they did maybe they would stop the OS X/iOS9 yearly release debacle....and don't get me started on their old hardware "killware" updates. They should allow the iPad 2/3 and 4S to run iOS 7 still !!!

 

[nick42983]

With Apple having become the behemoth it now is, Tim Cook (as CEO), has to serve his masters - the shareholders - in ways that Steve Jobs never did. With the iPhone making up 2/3 of Apple's income/profits (I think my figures are right) their stock in in a precarious spot if demand softens as a continuing result of mobile handset commoditization and the result of carriers subsidizing less and less.

Assuming that Tim Cook thinks shareholders are his masters, he's doing a poor job. AAPL is at almost the exact same price that it was 1 year ago. In the mean time Cook and his top brass have enriched themselves by selling tens of millions of $ in stock. Apple hasn't shown me any vision for the future since the "crossroads of liberal arts and technology" statement by Jobs half a decade ago. If Apple isn't going to create a converged mac/ipad, then I'd love to hear what their idea of a future world with Apple as a major player looks like. Thus far its been thinner, lighter, faster, nice but not compelling. They aren't even selling us on the Apple Watch, I had to do that myself and I think its a great product. Their marketing is asinine . Would it kill them to show actual customers praising the Watch or other products in commercials?

 

[OrangeInc]

This is obviously about profits. You can make a macbook pro that has a touch screen....when you detach the display, it goes into iOS mode. There's your hybrid with no loss to anyone except apple profits. I'm just a regular guy but I'm sure the best engineers in the world can figure how to pull that off. Heck, a high school student could probably pull it off.

 

[navaira]

Heck, a high school student could probably pull it off.

Which is why there are millions of companies as successful as Apple.

 

[jlc1978]

....and don't get me started on their old hardware "killware" updates. They should allow the iPad 2/3 and 4S to run iOS 7 still !!!

So you are proposing Apple limit new functionality of an OS update so that it can run on older, less capable hardware? technology has a very short life cycle in terms of upgradability and to limit upgrades to what is now EOL'd hardware would not be a wise move. It would take resources that can be better used creating newer versions o fetch OS and would require tradeoffs to ensure adequate performance on older hardware that would deliver a less than capable OS on newer hardware.

The older hardware still runs and functions as it did when purchased,, it just lacks the capability to run the latest release.

 

[Popeye206]

So you don't browse the internet, check email, look at photos, videos, movies, play games, take notes, make to do lists, do research, etc on your MacBook at all?

Sure... and I'd just take my Macbook for that anyway. I really don't see having two devices as an issue. Again, it allows me to pick the best tool for the job, and allows me to upgrade each on it's own as I see fit.