Apple: No Plans To Merge Mac and iPad (independent.co.uk) 82
Earlier this week, Apple unveiled the refreshed 11 and 12.9-inch iPad Pro models with a notable change: The new iPad Pro models are powered by the M1 chip, the company's in-house chipset that also powers the current-generation MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and Mac mini. Is the company planning to put macOS on the iPad in the future or merge iPads and Macbooks? No remains the answer. Apple marketing chief Greg Joswiak, in an interview: "There's two conflicting stories people like to tell about the iPad and Mac. On the one hand, people say that they are in conflict with each other. That somebody has to decide whether they want a Mac, or they want an iPad. Or people say that we're merging them into one: that there's really this grand conspiracy we have, to eliminate the two categories and make them one. And the reality is neither is true. We're quite proud of the fact that we work really, really hard to create the best products in their respective category." Hardware chief John Ternus, in the same interview: "We're pushing to make the best Mac we can make; we're pushing to make the best iPad we can make."
Shame. (Score:4, Interesting)
Because I can totally see a usage where my tablet/phone *is* my desktop at home, just plugged into a dock with an external GPU and display setup. We're almost there already.
Re:Shame. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I can totally see a usage where my tablet/phone *is* my desktop at home, just plugged into a dock with an external GPU and display setup. We're almost there already.
We've been almost there several times, with various Microsoft products. Fact is, the entire UI really needs to change for efficient use between touch and non-touch interfaces. What works with a pixel-perfect mouse and keyboard doesn't work with meaty sausage fingers.
Yes, it is possible to build an OS that detects what hardware is connected and switch how it looks and behaves. But... then you need application developers to produce software that does the same. Good luck with that.
Frankly having dedicated environments where software behaves consistent to the hardware it's on is probably for the best, at least for the near future.
Oh, and, no, it's not just that Microsoft did it wrong. I've used a very large Android device with keyboard and mouse as well and it's... also lame. Again because applications, mostly. Use the right tool for the job.
Re: Shame. (Score:2)
I've used a very large Android device with keyboard and mouse as well and it's... also lame.
I have connected a Bluetooth mouse to my phone. Brings up a regular mouse pointer on a tiny phone screen. Cute.
But also, there is a somewhat android-like thing called a Chromebook that is in a similar OS family to Android. Much like the iOS/macOs pairing.
Re: (Score:2)
I have connected a Bluetooth mouse to my phone. Brings up a regular mouse pointer on a tiny phone screen. Cute.
But also, there is a somewhat android-like thing called a Chromebook that is in a similar OS family to Android. Much like the iOS/macOs pairing.
And the point is Apple is ... maybe/kinda right.
They can't expect or force application developers to create dual interface software that works properly in both touch and keyboard/mouse modes.
Maybe this will change slowly over the next few years.
Maybe the big three+2 (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Gnome, and KDE) will come up with rational UI frameworks for programmers to code in so that the UIs can change based on the mode of the device?
Do Google, Microsoft, or Apple software actually do this?
I'm hopeful, but n
Re: (Score:1)
Fact is, the entire UI really needs to change for efficient use between touch and non-touch interfaces.
There is no difference between touch and non touch interface, unless idiots like Android programmers make it so. On an iPad with mouse, or an iPad used as external screen for a Mac: it is all the same.
No idea why people think there is a difference. What the funk would be the difference in touching the close button on a window displayed on an iPad versus using the mouse on a Mac?
Re:Shame. (Score:4, Insightful)
Fact is, the entire UI really needs to change for efficient use between touch and non-touch interfaces. There is no difference between touch and non touch interface, unless idiots like Android programmers make it so. On an iPad with mouse, or an iPad used as external screen for a Mac: it is all the same. No idea why people think there is a difference. What the funk would be the difference in touching the close button on a window displayed on an iPad versus using the mouse on a Mac?
Try RDPing to a desktop OS from a touch device and try to get any real work done. You'll spend a huge amount of time zooming in and out because the information-density and more importantly UI density aren't remotely compatible. On the desktop OS, buttons, controls, menus and so on are much more close to one another because they were optimized for pixel-perfect pointers. Tablet/mobile UI is designed with much more space because they're operated by touch. Sure, you can play lowest-common-denominator and go with a spread-out interface regardless of device, only now you've wasted tonnes of screen space for no reason. This is one of the many ways that Windows 10 is damned annoying... trying to be a tablet OS in a desktop world.
Input devices really do guide optimal interface. That's why airplanes have had yokes, not keyboards. That's why boats have wheels/tillers. That's why Tesla's touchscreen replacement of every control is damned irritating.
My point was that the moment you introduce a mouse, the UI paradigm changes. No current or impending OS handles that right now. The application ecosystem on each platform assumes certain hardware (ie. no mouse on mobile), so simply changing the OS itself is just toying with the chicken & egg problem. Can it happen? Absolutely. Is it something on the horizon? Not even almost.
Re: Shame. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're quite proud of the fact that we work really, really hard to create the best products in their respective category."
He went on to say...
We're also very proud of the fact and we've convinced many of our customers to buy the same product twice just so that they can run a different operating system.
Re: (Score:2)
We are starting to see devices take up multiple roles (desktop PC, tablet, etc.) The Microsoft Surface (with an x86/amd64 chip) comes to mind of something that can be used as a tablet, but also have a desktop role.
Smartphones and desktops isn't new either... Motorola had the Atrix that had that functionality almost ten years ago. The only real reason why we can't drop a smartphone into a dock is because device makers want to keep selling us more stuff.
Of course, Apple could have a tablet run both MacOS an
Re: Shame. (Score:2)
You wouldnâ(TM)t even have to run a different os, just sub in a tablet style finder app. Who remembers front row?
Re: (Score:2)
However, Apple wants people to buy both a Mac and an iPad,
However, people want to buy an iPad and a Mac.
It is a bit restrictive to use an iPad at home for real work, aka coding.
It is a bit clumsy to take out your laptop if you just want to read a book or chat with your GF on Telegram or Signal, oh - have to activate my pocket wifi to use my laptop to chat.
Apple haters every where, what is your damn problem?
Re: Shame. (Score:2)
I canâ(TM)t think of the last time they did this, but more than once has Apple said âoenoâ when a year or two later they proved they were lying the whole time.
Re: (Score:2)
Your ducking sentence ducking contains far too ducking few ducking instances of the ducking word 'duck'.
FTFY, ya quacker.
Re: (Score:2)
How about merge the Mac and iPhone? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That’s right - no merge (Score:2)
macOS will simply become iPadOS+ and they’ll just get rid of macOS altogether, since that’ll allow them to lock down Macs that much more.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple isn’t stupid - if it’s financially better for them to have just 1 platform (design, manufacturing, support), they’ll drop the smaller market in no time. Just look at how much the iPad Pro is being touted as a desktop replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean with a Mac and an iPad both being based on the M1 chip they are pretty close already, I would imagine they share a lot of similar logic design, just different PCB layout, different OS "version" and supplemental hardware. Just making the move away from Intel drops their development costs on the Mac platform by quite a bit I have to imagine. And it's not like the Mac division doesn't turn a profit based on it's own development costs, it's just a smaller segment. If Apple were actually losing money o
Re: (Score:3)
If Apple were actually losing money on every mac they sell they would have dropped it years ago.
I agree for now, they're still making money off of it, but it's still a tiny fraction of what their overall sales are now, especially with their push to "services, services, services!"
Right now, the "differentiating" thing for Macs is that basically you need them to be able to develop for iDevices - but I can see a time where they make Xcode for iPad which is essentially a 'dumb coding terminal', and all the code building, bundling and distribution of app is entirely done on Apple servers/services (yet anot
Re: (Score:2)
You might be right, I just think that if you look at the money put into the Mac side of things by itself and the money they make selling them it turns a profit, even if the whole thing by revenue is not big compared to phones and services, but a small profit is still profit nonetheless.
Also I would hope keeping the Mac line around is something more of a sense of pride to Apple's roots, having a real desktop/workstation platform lends a sense of "credibility" to Apples versus just being the "phone and app co
Re: (Score:2)
I guess if there's a demand for "higher horsepower" computers (if we still want to call them that in 5 years' time) that can't be provided in a iDevice package, they could stick around for some time longer.
But I can't really see Apple continuing to have 2 vastly separate OS's for each if "mobile" and "desktop" devices - I'm pretty sure we'll end up with a unified version of iOS, with specific tweaks for specific hardware (just like there's iPadOS now); this would be consistent with how Apple likes to consol
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
But I can't really see Apple continuing to have 2 vastly separate OS's for each if "mobile" and "desktop" devices
Seriously?
The OSes are the same. The UI libs are different. And thats it.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple isn't stupid...Just look at how much the iPad Pro is being touted as a desktop replacement.
No, Apple isn't stupid. Consumers now are.
A touchscreen-enabled tablet with a toddler-designed UI being touted as a desktop replacement, is obvious when you consider what the average InstaFaceTube junkie now does (or even knows how to do) with their what's-a-computer idiot-box.
No, I'm not saying all users are computer-illiterate idiots. I'm saying the overwhelming majority now CAN be, and are.
Re: (Score:2)
A touchscreen-enabled tablet with a toddler-designed UI being touted as a desktop replacement
iPadOS fully supports pointing devices since at least the last major release.
Most people don't know how microwaves work (Score:2)
Re: That’s right - no merge (Score:2)
It would make no sense. Mac sales are around 10% of revenues. It is a bigger business than iPad. This is not like Disney and Marvel comics, where revenues in the latter are a rounding error in Disney's books. We are talking about a very healthy $20-30 billion business.
Re: That’s right - no merge (Score:2)
That smaller market is around 10% of their revenues. That is a big and healthy business. We are not talking about something comparable to Marvel comics and Disney, with sales of the former being a rounding error in Disney's revenues.
Re: That’s right - no merge (Score:2)
macOS will simply become iPadOS+ and theyâ(TM)ll just get rid of macOS altogether, since thatâ(TM)ll allow them to lock down Macs that much more.
What a tired meme.
Since the addition of Gatekeeper, if Apple wanted to lock down macOS, it would take them about 30 minutes to make it happen, most of which would be spent Compiling.
So, since Apple hasn't done that in the many years that Gatekeeper and the Mac App Store have both been in existence, I'd be really surprised if they would suddenly decide to royally piss off pretty much everyone who has ever even seen a Mac, by changing course on that now.
If nothing else, it makes absolutely no business sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Since the addition of Gatekeeper, if Apple wanted to lock down macOS, it would take them about 30 minutes to make it happen, most of which would be spent Compiling.
Just because they're taking baby steps to get there (by using Gatekeeper as the 'gateway' - get it?) doesn't mean it's not happening.
After this much time, I think it does.
Re: (Score:1)
best for who? (Score:4, Interesting)
"We're quite proud of the fact that we work really, really hard to create the best products in their respective category."
The best product wouldn't have artificial limitations on what you can run.
Depends on which limit you are looking at (Score:1, Troll)
The best product wouldn't have artificial limitations on what you can run.
iOS is limited to things from the App Store (not really true, but let's pretend it is).
Android Tablet is limited by software actually written to work well on an Android tablet.
The thing is, that Android limitation is a lot more limiting than the iOS limitation., as there is a lot more iPad software.
For a software developer of course, there is theoretically no limit to what you can run on either platform.
Re: (Score:2)
iOS is limited to things from the App Store
The Mac is getting closer to that every day as well.
In what way?? (Score:2, Interesting)
The Mac is getting closer to that every day as well.
The Mac has in fact not moved on inch closer to that. It simply added the ability to let developers ALSO sign applications such that they are verified, but you can always load any other application you like.
In addition M1 Macs are ALSO able to run most iPad and iOS apps.
The Macs world of applications has only ever expanded, not shrank...
Re: (Score:2)
By default, recent mac OS can't run any application not installed from the app store. You have to "allow unknown source" just like on Android or whatever they call it. You do not have that option on iOS.
It's the first step. The next step is to make it even harder to enable that option. And finally they do like they did on iOS.
Microsoft would love to do it too. They are a bit behind (Windows 10 S-mode) however.
It's funny. (Score:3)
How is this level of delusion is any different than QAnon fantasies about Hillary Clinton running a child trafficking ring out of a pizza restaurant? You are inventing a strawman to justify how much you already hate a group of people, and then using that strawman as evidence for why you hate the
Re: (Score:2)
Good if they never reach that point. I'm only saying they are moving closer to that walled garden every day. It doesn't mean they'll lock the gate. But they did it on iOS.
They could do it on the Mac as well and wouldn't loose that much user base. Most would even defend the move saying it's more secure. And that JavaScript is there for those who don't like the App Store.
Re: (Score:3)
Except your theory is provably false, because macOS has a loophole so large, there's no way around
Re: In what way?? (Score:2)
Until they move to cloud hosted compilers that return signed code.
Or simply require the developers to submit their binary for signing.
Or tie a signing certificate to the machine that is from their apple developer account that the build process can use to sign code that only runs on the developers machine.
They did buy a cloud based build system, buddybuild, 3 years ago and are now shutting it down. Wonder what they're going to do with the IP now?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's called a compiler.
If you develop an app on macOS, you're going to have to compile it, and it's going to spit out a binary. That binary is unsigned, so the OS needs to be able to run it so you can test and debug your application.
That doesn't make any sense. The OS is in no way obligated to run any binary you present. The fact that you compiled it on the same machine is completely meaningless.
What about the need to test and debug, you ask? Apple already locks down iOS, requiring a $99/year account to test apps on real hardware. There is no technical reason that they couldn't require something similar for macOS applications.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't have individual trusted certificates for code signing? It's either accept software from every malware writer willing to pay 99$ or appstore only?
That's almost useless, intentionally so I assume. Apple can still ban the occasional malware author's signing key if he distributes outside the appstore to make themselves look good, but no one can set up an alternative appstore without shooting a massive hole in the MacOS security model.
They are not going to change this, this is at the same time anticomp
Re: (Score:2)
The Mac is getting closer to that every day as well.
Actually, no. You are an idiot.
Re: Depends on which limit you are looking at (Score:2)
For a software developer of course, there is theoretically no limit to what you can run on either platform.
That's one of the silliest things about the Apple Hate on Slashdot.
Here is a Forum that counts a fair amount of alleged Software Devs. as members; and yet, even though Apple gives away multiple Developer Tools (in fact, complete end-to-end Toolchains for every single one of their OSes), which could be (and have been) used to Develop (or Port) pretty much any software imaginable for their own particular Apple devices, all with zero say-so by Apple. But somehow "Apple controls what software you can Run."
Prett
Re: (Score:3)
"We're quite proud of the fact that we work really, really hard to create the best products in their respective category."
The best product wouldn't have artificial limitations on what you can run.
The true artificial intelligence today, is the average "computer" user.
Therefore, Apple is making the best product in their respective category, with that category being maximizing revenue by appeasing to a simpleton audience.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You hate Apple because they make computers that are easy to use. Appliance computing makes you increasingly irrelevant. My advice, find something else from which to derive your self-esteem so that you don't care so much what phone somebody else owns.
Settle down there. You know what they say about those who assume.
Ironically typing this on a MBP and I started becoming an Apple customer in '84. I hardly despise them. Apple is damn good at what they do. One of the best at making compatible devices for the masses. (Runs various VMs pretty well too)
Every UI has become quite compatible in the last few years. My point stands. And we're hardly irrelevant when device security remains bad and not getting much better. I wish people were simply more tech
Re: (Score:2)
Your favorite hobbies are not special. It is no more necessary for people to be literate about them than any other aspect of modern life.
Re: (Score:2)
The best product fits the user's use cases the best.
There are users who are not you, and have different use cases.
Re: (Score:2)
The best product wouldn't have artificial limitations on what you can run.
And which artificial limitations would that be?
Re: (Score:2)
"The best product wouldn't have artificial limitations on what you can run."
And, here we go again...
A slashdot comment that fails to understand the blindingly obvious.
Firstly, for the VAST majority of users, tinkering with an OS or the hardware isn't something they want to do.
They want a reliable computer to "get stuff done."
The market for tinkering is TINY - and it is exceptionally well covered by a plethora of hardware components and operating systems.
Secondly, your statement isn't strictly true or even s
Re: (Score:1)
And, here we go again...
A slashdot comment that fails to understand the blindingly obvious.
Yep, you certainly wrote one.
Firstly, for the VAST majority of users, tinkering with an OS or the hardware isn't something they want to do.
That is wholly irrelevant to the point made. Strike 1.
Secondly, your statement isn't strictly true or even sane.
It is true, and you're calling me insane for stating an opinion which is well-supported. Fuck you. Strike two.
What exactly, pray tell, is the artificial limitation you have come up against?
If you can't tell what it is from the context of the conversation, you are the same person Apple assumed couldn't handle multiple mouse buttons. Strike three, get the fuck out of here.
Re: best for who? (Score:2)
B.S. (Score:2)
It does not matter what you think. They will shove that turd down your throat and make you accept it.
Merge? No. Common Codebase? Maybe (Score:1)
With a common hardware platform, it wouldn't take much to give developers an IDE with tools and an API that allowed their code to auto-sense the platform they were on. There would be a degree of "automated" reformatting for the display, with enhancements where needed.
Remember, the screen resolution of an iPad is much, much closer to the screen resolution of an iMac than it is an iPhone. I know resolution isn't
Re: (Score:2)
If you're developing a new app targeting the latest cross platform APIs in both MacOS and iOS sure that would be fine. Same with Windows Store Apps that use the latest Windows Runtime.
But if you need to run legacy applications which generally are the most important applications that depend on decades of development targeting the old APIs it's not so easy. Just look at Microsoft's struggles to both kill off Win32 and now to integrate Win32 into their modern shell.
No official plan (Score:2)
No plans, so now we know it is definitely going to happen.
Taking bets if it is announced for WWDC 2021 later this year, or if this lands in 2023.
Re: (Score:2)
2023 is likely. Two more revs of silicon, possibly with wireless pci/thunderbolt/USB3+/whatever for peripherals and displays.
Mac Mode will let you place the iPad in a special stand to use as the second monitor and run Mac apps (ARM only).
That's how they kill off the Intel inventory.
Being Apple it does make sense that it won't come to iPhone initially so they can sell a bunch more iPads.
Then they'll sell a MacBook Air KVM shell for 80% the cost of one now but you have to use your phone as the CPU.
Then the l
It's already happening (Score:5, Insightful)
The MacBook laptops are much more locked down than past models, from both a hardware and software perspective. They are becoming increasingly impossible to service, just like an iPad. The new iMacs, with the cute colors, are looking more and more like fashion accessories.
I still like the Darwin roots of the MacBooks but with each new model they leave me farther behind the original spirit of what the Mac stood for. Snow Leopard was probably the last MacOS that I felt was tight and smooth. Since then it has become more bloated.
Having said that, the M1 processor is fantastic and it's going to be a real game changer. I just wish that Apple would bring back some of the power user capabilities of days gone by.
Re: (Score:2)
The MacBook laptops are much more locked down than past models, from both a hardware and software perspective. They are becoming increasingly impossible to service, just like an iPad. The new iMacs, with the cute colors, are looking more and more like fashion accessories.
I’m an Apple fan, though I’ve stopped buying their Macs because I simply don’t need a desktop computer anymore - the iPad does everything I want / have time for (with my job, hobbies, and 1-soon-2 kids, I just don’t have time to geek anymore). But I have to say - the iMacs have ALWAYS been about cute colors and being fashion accessories. They’re still pretty decent computing power in this iteration, but... the original G3 gumdrops back in the late 90s had that translucent plast
Re: (Score:2)
"But I have to say - the iMacs have ALWAYS been about cute colors and being fashion accessories" - Haha yeah I have to admit you're right. I have one of the early iMacs - not the gumdrop ones but one of the early Intel ones. Core2Duo processor. Pretty ancient by todays standards but damn if the thing still runs. I maxed out the memory and swapped in an SSD. It was too slow to run MacOS but it runs Linux pretty nicely and serves as a secondary websurfing box.
I have to admit those old MacBooks and iPads were
Re: (Score:2)
"The new iMacs, with the cute colors, are looking more and more like fashion accessories."
Oh, heck, yeah, God forbid you actually want to own a computer that looks cool.
Bring back those ugly beige boxes!
In this world, as superficial as it may seem, people actually do want a device that looks amazing - it may not be your bag, but it sure works for others. The idea of a pink computer, to me, is just ... WTF? - but for some people, it's a selling point - God knows why, but that's just human nature.
But I get th
Re: (Score:2)
"Oh, heck, yeah, God forbid you actually want to own a computer that looks cool. Bring back those ugly beige boxes!" - I was being kind of tongue in cheek with my comment. To each their own I guess but a pastel colored computer? I bet they sell a ton of them but I won't be lining up for one :-)
"I don't like it much either, but you have to remember, for most users, that was never a "thing" anyway." - Oh yeah, I fully admit that I'm in the minority in that I like to tinker with hardware. Same thing with cars.
Re: (Score:2)
The MacBook laptops are much more locked down than past models, from both a hardware and software perspective. They are becoming increasingly impossible to service, just like an iPad.
Because Apple have already merged the Mac, Ipad and Iphone, they just have different levels of restriction on them.
Of course Apple aren't lying here, they _ARE_ keeping them as separate product lines as how better to get a person to buy the same product 3 times. Want to do anything that requires a phone call, you'll find that restricted to an Iphone, want to use "productivity" software or a keyboard, you'll need an Mac. Apple will eventually do away with the pretense of even making a Mac use a different int
No (Score:2)
They want people to buy both. Why would they if the products are too similar?
The "best"... (Score:2)
Now I would like to see their definition of "good".
Because, looking at Apple products, it seems (different, but) as far away from "good" as that of a certain German party, about 100 years ago.
Meanwhile, the Microsoft Surface line keeps going (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the Microsoft Surface line keeps soldiering along, unifying two distinct platforms (tablet and laptop) and they're doing just fine.
Apple is stupid for ignoring the success of the MSFT Surface platform.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the Microsoft Surface line keeps soldiering along, unifying two distinct platforms (tablet and laptop) and they're doing just fine.
Apple is stupid for ignoring the success of the MSFT Surface platform.
Yes, apple’s incredible market failures and sinking stock price clearly demonstrate their ineptitude.
Not sure why they should play Microsoft’s game when their own niche has turned out so nicely...