Apple Software Chief Rejects macOS on iPad (macstories.net) 61
Apple software chief Craig Federighi has ruled out bringing macOS to the iPad, amusingly using a kitchen utensil analogy to explain the company's design philosophy. "We don't want to create a boat car or, you know, a spork," Federighi said in an interview. "Someone said, 'If a spoon's great, a fork's great, then let's combine them into a single utensil, right?' It turns out it's not a good spoon and it's not a good fork. It's a bad idea. And so we don't want to build sporks."
The new version of iPadOS, which will ship to consumers later this year, features dynamically resizable windows that users can drag by their corners and a menu bar that is accessible through swipe gestures or cursor movement.
Some observers might consider the iPad Pro itself a "convertible" product that blurs the line between tablet and laptop, he said. However, the Mac and iPad serve distinct purposes, he asserted. "The Mac lets the iPad be iPad," he said adding that Apple's objective "has not been to have iPad completely displace those places where the Mac is the right tool for the job." Rather than full convergence, Federighi said the iPad "can be inspired by elements of the Mac" while remaining a separate platform. "I think the Mac can be inspired by elements of iPad, and I think that that's happened a great deal."
The new version of iPadOS, which will ship to consumers later this year, features dynamically resizable windows that users can drag by their corners and a menu bar that is accessible through swipe gestures or cursor movement.
Some observers might consider the iPad Pro itself a "convertible" product that blurs the line between tablet and laptop, he said. However, the Mac and iPad serve distinct purposes, he asserted. "The Mac lets the iPad be iPad," he said adding that Apple's objective "has not been to have iPad completely displace those places where the Mac is the right tool for the job." Rather than full convergence, Federighi said the iPad "can be inspired by elements of the Mac" while remaining a separate platform. "I think the Mac can be inspired by elements of iPad, and I think that that's happened a great deal."
How about let the users decide (Score:1)
and apple does not get there 30% with that choice! (Score:2)
and apple does not get there 30% with that choice!
Re: How about let the users decide (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
you want to have operating system be a user toggle switch???
im sorry but are you retarded? have you ever worked with an end-user before? do you even understand what you're saying?
Re: (Score:3)
Just make it an option users can toggle, how hard is it.
That assumes that MacOS could just run on an iPad without any additional work. If this were true the community would have already accomplished it via jailbreaking an iPad and installing it. The fact that they haven't (as far as I am aware at least), suggests that it would take at least some effort on Apple's part to get it working; effort they've decided is better spent elsewhere apparently. Anecdotally, I don't know anyone who says they wish their iPad would run MacOS.
Re: (Score:3)
Anecdotally, I don't know anyone who says they wish their iPad would run MacOS.
I'd like it if my iPad ran macOS.
When I decided to get an iPad it was in part because I learned that the iPad was now running an OS separate from the iPhone and so was more suited to be an actual tablet computer than a big iPhone. I was quite disappointed when trying something as simple as attaching a USB printer so I could print out something. There was no "add printer" function like with macOS. Instead I had to use AirPrint or install a vendor specific app. Even after installing the app I could not do
Thunderbolt + display only mode (Score:2)
If the iPad had a display only mode, as iMac's used to have, and the USB-C connector was upgraded to Thunderbolt then perhaps I could use an iPad for such ad hoc mobility.
Yes, I could get a MacBook Pro. But to be honest I am rarely on the road with it, and my MPBs generally just travel from one desk to another, each desk with keyboard, mouse and display. It's quit
Re: (Score:2)
I have a travel case for my Mac mini M4, keyboard and mouse. When I occasionally work with a collaborator at his home he provides a display.
If the iPad had a display only mode, as iMac's used to have, and the USB-C connector was upgraded to Thunderbolt then perhaps I could use an iPad for such ad hoc mobility.
Yes, I could get a MacBook Pro. But to be honest I am rarely on the road with it, and my MPBs generally just travel from one desk to another, each desk with keyboard, mouse and display. It's quite literally a desktop replacement. With the mini + display only iPad scenario above my occasional hotel room or conference room visit is covered.
You can use Apple's Built-In Sidecar Functionality to use your iPad as a Mac Display over WiFi or USB-C. Although primarily designed as a secondary display, you can set the iPad up as your Mac's Primary Display, too:
https://www.solveyourtech.com/... [solveyourtech.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, I thought it was secondary only.
It certainly is intended that way; but I have a feeling that the way macOS adapts to changing Display Configurations, that once you get a Sidecar Display Instatiated, macOS will grab onto it if it can!
It definitely is treating the iPad as a full-fledged "Display". I had my A16 iPad setup with an M4 Mac mini, and had it Mirroring the Primary Display. Even though it was supposedly Mirroring, using the macOS Zoom function, the Image on the iPad did NOT Zoom! (Oops!) But that tells me that Apple is treating the
Re: (Score:2)
I was quite disappointed when trying something as simple as attaching a USB printer so I could print out something. There was no "add printer" function like with macOS. Instead I had to use AirPrint or install a vendor specific app. Even after installing the app I could not do something so simple as connect the printer directly to the iPad by USB to print.
So you want Apple to Port CUPS to iPadOS JUST so the THREE PEOPLE on the Planet that want to hook their Random Printer to their iPad via USB are satisfied, is that about right?!?
Well, alrighty, then! [Rollseyes]
Re: (Score:2)
So you want Apple to Port CUPS to iPadOS JUST so the THREE PEOPLE on the Planet that want to hook their Random Printer to their iPad via USB are satisfied, is that about right?!?
Well, alrighty, then! [Rollseyes]
No, I want macOS running in the iPad so that all the little bits that come with macOS don't need to be ported. The iPad series and MacBook series both run Apple silicon processors now, and almost certainly have many other hardware similarities. There's no "porting" required. Unless I'm missing something big the process to get macOS on iPad would be almost trivial for Apple, it's not like someone from the outside trying to "hackintosh" the iPad since Apple knows all the bits and pieces in the iPad. Once
Re: (Score:3)
The community would face challenges. Like MacOS does not have touch controls etc. Might not be to hard of you can bring the code over from iOS components and do new builds; while being out of reach for "the community" which is more or less restricted to mixing binaries from different sources and applying the odd patch.
Apple's bigger problem would be getting any sort of cohesive environment for users that isn't a confusing mess. Do you have to swtich to iOS to run an 'app' or can you do in MacOS in a windo
Re: How about let the users decide (Score:1)
You can already run iOS and iPadOS apps on macOS (with Apple silicon) if the developer allows it.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's bigger problem would be getting any sort of cohesive environment for users that isn't a confusing mess. Do you have to swtich to iOS to run an 'app' or can you do in MacOS in a window? If you change iOS settings, grant permissions etc, does that impact MacOS for that app or not, what about the other way. If you really make it toggle switch where are my files/data? Can access the respective volumes from each platform or are they on the same volume. The iOS UI does have the files app but most apps don't have filesystem hierarchy concept for navigating. Am I expected to copy documents between them? If so how do I know which is the most recent version. What should MacOS do if I don't have an "application" associated but i do have an iOS app that has the right url handlers, suggest I visit the Mac App store, or launch the iOS app?
These are all excellent questions that don't all have obvious or "one-size-fits-all" answers.
Right now, the base hardware is tantalizingly-similar. This creates the false impression that it should "just work"; or at least be a straightforward task to have full-blown macOS, with a metric fuckton of device-drivers and frameworks that have absolutely no application on any iPad, but without solutions or frameworks that provide a Compatibility Layer with the iPad Hardware, working without a hitch. Nevermind the
Re: (Score:2)
I would love a solid shell and command line utilities for dealing with the frequent bugs in Mail and Safari that are difficult to troubleshoot. I default to blaming my mail host or ads, but that does not get things resolved. There are also a few Mac apps that don't really have solid iPad equivalents that would be ice to have at times.
Re: (Score:2)
c.f. Google's vision for Chromebook.
it has the Android runtime for touchscreens but has a WSL-like container for desktops.
The only thing lacking is a decent web browser! I'd sudo apt install firefox in a heartbeat.
Re: (Score:2)
You can do exactly that, just install what you described as a "WSL-like container". The containers all run Debian, and you can apt-get firefox and run it. It's been a while since I used the environment, so I can't speak for whether they've made any improvements, but the big issue was it was kinda slow and the UI janky because everything's using default themes rather than whatever GNOME/KDE/etc's open desktop stuff has defined.
I gave up on ChromeOS myself though, it was a nice concept, but... I mean, you can
Re: (Score:2)
I did play around on an old laptop with Chrome OS Flex (or Neverware CloudReady as it was called) during Covid lockdowns. But I don't own a Chromebook so never got to test out the Google Play store functionality. For an iPad-like experience you need an app catalogue; where Windows 11 never cut through but Android on ChromeOS would, I assume.
Well yeah, all good, I am back to XFCE/Debian on that old laptop. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assumin
People might be interested in a dock? Thunderbolt? (Score:2)
I don't know anyone who says they wish their iPad would run MacOS.
When it's being used as a tablet, probably very few. But using their iPad as a display for a desktop, there might be more interest there. Imagine some Mac mini variant that is a dock for an iPad. Undock, the iPadOS controls the screen. Dock, and it goes into a display only mode, the Mac mini takes over the screen. I suppose you could have something simpler than a mini, something that really is just a dock and let the iPad CPU switch to macOS. However I like the idea of some sort of mini variant so we can ha
Re: (Score:2)
You sound like an executive. "How hard could it be?"
Everything is always much, MUCH harder than an executive or layperson thinks it will be.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a toggle. They have iPad Air, which is the consumer product. And they have the iPad Pro, which ... is for "pro"fessionals. That latter one needs macos. The consumer grade product really does deserve the iPad OS as it stands.
The problem is marketing. They slap this "pro" thing around just to mean "higher end hardware". Most people want the higher end hardware, if they can afford it. They may not want the professional grade OS. So Apple would need to rejigger their naming convention. Trivial bu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just make it an option users can toggle, how hard is it. But no they can't have that, they have to decide what the users want.
I take it you're not familiar with the way Apple works. It's the other way around, Apple decides what the user wants and if you don't like it you're the one holding wrong.
Besides, Apple is in the process of killing OSX.
Hair Force One is wrong (Score:2)
If he was correct, he wouldn't need to say this.
Re: (Score:3)
If he was correct, he wouldn't need to say this.
Yup. This right here is why I don't own an iPad, even though I own an iPhone, a Mac, and a Vision Pro. My only tablet (other than a first-gen iPad Mini that we all got for free when they first came out) is a cheap Kindle Fire 7-inch that I use for watching Netflix when I'm in the middle of something at night and don't want to stop to take a shower. Oh, and a 21.5-inch Android tablet that I use as an electronic music stand for my electronic organ, but that's a tablet in roughly the same way that an iMac i
Re: (Score:2)
And you already know he's incorrect when he starts trashing on the spork. As it turns out, sporks do work as both forks and spoons. He just sounds like an idiot.
The real reason you won't see macOS on an iPad: that would defeat the walled garden and allow you to install whatever the fuck you want, and Apple isn't going to officially allow that if they don't absolutely have to.
Re: (Score:2)
As it turns out, sporks do work as both forks and spoons. He just sounds like an idiot.
... and yet, sporks are used only rarely, mostly by campers or at picnics, both of which are specialized niche use-cases where minimizing the amount of gear to transport justifies the necessary compromises in usability.
So, his analogy is exactly right. Most people don't want to use a spork, and will only use one in situations where access to a separate spoon and a fork isn't an easy option.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's what it is NOW. (Score:3)
"We don't want to create a boat car or, you know, a spork,"
That's what the iDevices are now. They're artificially limited to try to get people to buy both an iDevice and a Macintosh.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what the iDevices are now. They're artificially limited to try to get people to buy both an iDevice and a Macintosh.
Isn't that like saying that Apple stopped selling the "toaster" Macs so that Apple could sell both a computer and a display? You should have heard the cries when Apple started to sell the keyboard and mouse separately too. As if other computer manufacturers did things any different.
The iPad is something like the "personal digital assistants" from ancient times. They'd function relatively well on their own but to get the most from them meant having a computer. With an iPad equipped with a SIM slot it can
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't that like saying that Apple stopped selling the "toaster" Macs so that Apple could sell both a computer and a display?
No.
Longer answer, you could buy lots of third party displays that worked perfectly well with Macintosh computers (and you still can) so that also means Apple can fail to sell you a display by not integrating it.
The iPad is something like the "personal digital assistants" from ancient times.
The iPad is absolutely capable of running Mac OS, but it's artificially restricted from doing so, in an effort to make you buy Mac OS. And there are Macintoshes which could easily run iOS, but they don't let you do that.
This distinction was created artificially and intentionally both to enforce a cer
Re: (Score:3)
Longer answer, you could buy lots of third party displays that worked perfectly well with Macintosh computers (and you still can) so that also means Apple can fail to sell you a display by not integrating it.
Isn't that a lot like how people can buy an iPad for "tablet stuff" but if they want a "real computer" then they can get a computer running Windows or Linux? I'm not seeing how buying an iPad locks people into buying a Mac laptop, desktop, or any other Apple product.
The iPad is absolutely capable of running Mac OS, but it's artificially restricted from doing so, in an effort to make you buy Mac OS. And there are Macintoshes which could easily run iOS, but they don't let you do that.
If people wanted a portable computer that ran macOS then they'd buy a MacBook. If people want to run iOS apps on their MacBook then they need only go to the App Store and download it. So long as the app behaves well with the "accessibility" a
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not seeing how buying an iPad locks people into buying a Mac laptop
For most of my day-to-day use - socials, email, etc - I can easily get by with iOS. I'd be happy to be able to take just one device - an iPad - and do the day-to-day, as well as open up an instance of Xcode to work on projects, too. But even though the underlying hardware is clearly capable of this, I can't; I'm artificially restrained. This is a case where I'm forced - eh, not quite at gun point; maybe more like compelled - to get a MacBook, if I want to be mobile. I
Re: (Score:2)
There's no reason why Apple could not have simply let you run in both modes on both kinds of hardware, allowing you to choose, and to provide user interface standards for both types of interface â" and allow apps to implement one thing or both. And there's no reason why they can't switch to doing that.
I can think of one reason -- supporting that would at least double the amount of QA they needed to do to validate each new release of either MacOS or iOS. That would be a pretty significant amount of overhead to support a configuration that most people didn't ask for and don't want.
OTOH if macOS was informally "ported" to the iPad by some non-Apple group, Apple might just look the other way and say "that's not supported by us, if you do it, no warranty, YMMV, good luck".
Re: (Score:2)
It's lock in. If you want a decent multi-tasking tablet, get an Android one. There are many to choose from, with equal of better hardware than an iPad.
People get locked into the Apple ecosystem, so their only choice is an iPad and further lock-in, or trying hard to break out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
"We don't want to create a boat car or, you know, a spork,"
That's what the iDevices are now. They're artificially limited to try to get people to buy both an iDevice and a Macintosh.
Now?
Idevices have always been limited compared to their competition, deliberately so.
However they're starting to need that artificial limitation more than ever as they kill OSX without wanting to kill the cash cow that is the Mac user, so your IDevice will be deliberately hobbled so they can sell you a slightly less hobbled Mac labelled IDevice for more money than it's worth.
Re: (Score:2)
Now?
Idevices have always been limited compared to their competition, deliberately so.
Yes, now is part of always. Why is this even part of the discussion?
However they're starting to need that artificial limitation more than ever as they kill OSX without wanting to kill the cash cow that is the Mac user, so your IDevice will be deliberately hobbled so they can sell you a slightly less hobbled Mac labelled IDevice for more money than it's worth.
Starting to? This is how it's always worked.
Are you stuck in a time loop or something? That might explain your confusion over these words...
This is about Revenue not user experience (Score:1)
Managing these products with separate OS's and requiring different software for use on both, helps insulate Apple from cannibalization of their own revenue by someone buying an ipad instead of a laptop or vice versa. Part of their pricing strategy with the keyboards & such for ipad is to help ensure price parity between these two platforms, and to disincentize as many as possible from thinking they can get away with just an ipad.
Re: (Score:2)
Managing these products with separate OS's and requiring different software for use on both, helps insulate Apple from cannibalization of their own revenue by someone buying an ipad instead of a laptop or vice versa. Part of their pricing strategy with the keyboards & such for ipad is to help ensure price parity between these two platforms, and to disincentize as many as possible from thinking they can get away with just an ipad.
If the idea is to disincentivize Users from thinking of their iPad as their Daily Driver, then kindly explain the "What's a Computer?" iPad Ad Campaign. . .
so it's not a spork? (Score:2)
"The new version of iPadOS, which will ship to consumers later this year, features dynamically resizable windows that users can drag by their corners and a menu bar that is accessible through swipe gestures or cursor movement."
So it's a spork. Isn't this exactly what he is arguing against but for the name?
Remember when the distinguishing UI feature of tablets/phones was ONE APP at a time? Remember when Macs were one app at a time, for that matter? Being on different development timelines does not mean th
Re: (Score:2)
So it's a spork. Isn't this exactly what he is arguing against but for the name?
That sweeeeet 30% cut from the AppStore (sure, sure, alternative payment systems are allowed for now, but this can change).
But the iPad *IS* the spork. (Score:1)
Re: But the iPad *IS* the spork. (Score:2)
It is a great piece of hardware hobbled by awful software.
Tablet PCs suck. Always have, always will. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A former manager of mine left the Mac team for the Windows team and, of course, had to get all new hardware. He picked up one of those tablet PCs and loved it.
He could plug in a big display, keyboard, mouse, etc and use it like PC. But when he had to go to a meeting, he could unplug it and take notes with a pen--which he said was easier and less distracting to the presenter. When the meeting was done, he would come back to the office and have it turn his written notes into text.
Re: (Score:2)
nowadays it's 1 cable for power and all that via thunderbolt / usb-c
2-in-1s are ok, but when you're in note taking our drawing mode you "lose" the normal multitasking laptop stuff even when it's still going on in the background. eg if you need to look something up, answer a slack message etc.
So some 2 device thing tends to work better imo. though Ii admir my hands on experience is limited.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, not without some justification, the trope that Microsoft sabotaged their 20th century desktop paradigm of Windows 7 and have spent a decade and a half with 8, 10 and 11 dragging Windows into the iPad era only for Apple themselves to resist!
c.f. Qt manages it at the toolkit level thanks to the work Nokia did all those years ago with Symbian and Meego. I'd try out the KDE spin for Fedora but I don't have an x86 tablet handy.
https://fedoraproject.org/spin... [fedoraproject.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Made "do you have notes from..." -- "email? Here's a PDF." an almost amusing joke with friends. I even did homework long hand in OneNote and print out the pages to turn in.
A shame. iPad Pro has tons of business potential (Score:2)
The iPad pro would be ideal for running something closer to macOS on. A lot of businesses would jump at that opportunity. Currently Apple hobbles the iPad Pro so much you have to wonder why they bothered to make one. Businesses would love to use the devices and be able to develop their own in-house software (and hardware) for their employees and internal purposes, without having to go through the nonsense to allow developers to side load their apps on a limited number of devices. The way you can with, yo
What a load of crap (Score:3)
A Real OS (Score:3)
He's right. (Score:4)
Honestly, the only iThing I own is a phone, so I may be off here. But... From what I'm seeing in the comments, the iPad (Pro) seems like decent hardware (maybe missing some useful ports), hobbled by mediocre software.
The problem is that if they tried to merge MacOS and iPadOS, you'd wind up with... the Apple equivalent of Windows 8. There's no way in hell that Tim would allow that.
Re: (Score:3)
I think the problem is really that the iPad Pro would be better suited for something more macOS-like while the other iPads (used by kids, POS systems, kiosks, and the computer illiterate) are better suited for the existing iOS.
iPad Pro could definitely be super cool with a more computer-like OS, but that's probably their smallest chunk of sales and it would require the biggest investment.
If you look at web stats for pretty much any website that gets a lot of traffic, you'll see that tablets are almost alway
Re: (Score:2)
People just rarely use tablets to browse the web or do any general computing.
I think you have a cart-and-horse problem, here. People could do "serious" work on iPads if the software allowed it. I had an iPad pro, and aside from Xcode, and ARM embedded development, I did just about everything on it. Spreadsheets, documents, graphical diagrams, SSH to support remote machines, email, etc. I had a company supplied MacBook, but the iPad did just about everything I needed, and was easier to use, in some cases; like when I had to pull off the highway on my drive home to resolve a tick
Translation (Score:2)
I own both, but I'd own both even if the iPad had a full OS. I need the more robust computing power in the Mac. And it is hard to beat the iPad for reading and surfing the internet away from a desk or table. However, it would certainly be nice to have the iPad be a full computer too. There is no reason it shouldn't be except to try to get the casual computer user to buy both instead of just the iPad.
Lacking courage? (Score:2)
I would totally buy an iPad if it ran the full Xcode.
I would totally buy a MacBook if I could draw on it.
I like my iPhone 16 Pro. I don't buy their other devices because I hate Apple; it's their lack of courage to do what users want.
It's about Darwin (Score:1)
The fundamental technical difficulty is bringing Darwin to the iPad, which supports POSIX, open source like hombrew plus Xcode, and that is a BIG leap for iPadOS. I'll admit I'd like to see that and buy it myself, but not only is it a bit of a spork, it's also opening up the iPadOS to malware that only macOS has to endure right now. I'm happy with my tech-adversarial dad having just iPadOS as it is.
Re: (Score:2)
The fundamental technical difficulty is bringing Darwin to the iPad, which supports POSIX, open source like hombrew plus Xcode, and that is a BIG leap for iPadOS. I'll admit I'd like to see that and buy it myself, but not only is it a bit of a spork, it's also opening up the iPadOS to malware that only macOS has to endure right now. I'm happy with my tech-adversarial dad having just iPadOS as it is.
That is a very important point; and one that Apple has consistently made themselves, too.
But what if Apple ported Containers to iPadOS? Could their lightweight VMs provide enough Sandboxing to run macOS in a Container without jeopardizing the Host iPad's Base Environment? I personally think that at least the Mx iPad Pros should be able to handle that without choking, and hopefully without exposing it unnecessarily.