iPad Pro Apple Silicon on the Mac unintentionally killed the iPad Pro

[Abazigal]

You can't possibly think that. You'd seriously like to carry around a bag of gadgets instead of one that does all well??? You do know your iPhone killed off the iPod right? Do you love spending 1k+ for an iPad and another 1K+ on a laptop? If so, you are the consumer Timmy loves. The rest of us would welcome one device.

The counterpoint to that is that I don’t think we can have one device that makes for a great Mac and a great iPad. As the surface pro has demonstrated, something has to give (in its case, it was an okay laptop with a broken hinge, and a subpar tablet).

I am okay with owning both an iPad and a MacBook if it means I have a great tablet when I want one, and a great laptop when I need one. If Apple can somehow merge the two together with no compromises, I am all for it. But for the moment at least, I don’t think it’s possible, and I don’t think installing macOS on an iPad is the panacea everyone is making it out to be either.

 

[maxoakland]

The Intel Macs were getting a little behind and macOS updates were not as polished as the had been in the past. I do think that we will continue to see convergence with macOS and iPadOS, StageManager on the Mac is a prime example of that happening.

None of Apple’s software has been polished for a long time. But on the hardware front, just think about it. Could it be that the Intel Macs fell behind because Apple had been focusing on a huge secret transition to Apple Silicon?

 

[Cole82]

The counterpoint to that is that I don’t think we can have one device that makes for a great Mac and a great iPad. As the surface pro has demonstrated, something has to give (in its case, it was an okay laptop with a broken hinge, and a subpar tablet).

I am okay with owning both an iPad and a MacBook if it means I have a great tablet when I want one, and a great laptop when I need one. If Apple can somehow merge the two together with no compromises, I am all for it. But for the moment at least, I don’t think it’s possible, and I don’t think installing macOS on an iPad is the panacea everyone is making it out to be either.

I have to disagree with you on the Surface. I've owned a few different versions as well as a SurfaceBook and all were fantastic. (I used them in auditing, so heavy spreadsheet use.) I have a preference for MacOS which is why I have Apple now, but I'd take a Mac version of the SurfaceBook any day.

 

[Abazigal]

I have to disagree with you on the Surface. I've owned a few different versions as well as a SurfaceBook and all were fantastic. (I used them in auditing, so heavy spreadsheet use.) I have a preference for MacOS which is why I have Apple now, but I'd take a Mac version of the SurfaceBook any day.

Suffice to say, I am not a fan of the surface pro form factor (not least because I can’t hold the laptop by the keyboard, and the kickstand causes it to take up more space on a flat surface than it should).

The thin form factor likely means more aggressive thermal throttling as well, and when it comes to a pure tablet experience, I find I prefer using my iPad to teach in class, in part due to iPadOS and native iOS apps being better optimised for touch.

I don’t deny there are probably people for whom the surface pro form factor is a great fit. I find it just makes compromises in all the wrong places for me, and I am happier using a separate MBA and iPad for my work.

 

[exoticSpice]

The thin form factor likely means more aggressive thermal throttling as well, and when it comes to a pure tablet experience, I find I prefer using my iPad to teach in class, in part due to iPadOS and native iOS apps being better optimised for touch.

This will be sloved with Qulacomm's Nuvia cores in 2024. These chips are from the people that designed M1.

I love the surface, as it's very versatile. I can play CSGO when docked and in bed I can read a book.

 

[GuruZac]

To the 12,9“ owners: what‘s your use case for such a huge tablet? I‘m really curious.

I preferred the larger 12.9 (originally 2018 12.9 and now M1) for note taking in Split View while watching lectures/videos/PowerPoints during my didactic years of medical school. Now it’s a wonderful media consumption device and I also still use in clinic without the Magic Keyboard as we still get some didactic lectures. My M1 MacBook Air is my main device in clinic. The battery just never quits, and macOS 13 with Stage Manger is really nice and much more functional than Stage Manager on iPadOS.

 

[Spock]

None of Apple’s software has been polished for a long time. But on the hardware front, just think about it. Could it be that the Intel Macs fell behind because Apple had been focusing on a huge secret transition to Apple Silicon?

Oh the Apple silicon transition is exactly why the Intels Macs didn’t get updated

 

[sparksd]

This will be sloved with Qulacomm's Nuvia cores in 2024. These chips are from the people that designed M1.

I love the surface, as it's very versatile. I can play CSGO when docked and in bed I can read a book.

As do I - a 16GB i7 Surface Pro 7. Great device, has been real solid for me. But my M1 12.9 is the better tablet experience. Different devices for different uses.

 

[sam_dean]

Before Apple Silicon on Mac, around the 2015-2019 time, iPad Pro had better software and hardware than the Mac and the Mac was seen as a legacy product, both by Apple themselves internally and the userbase. Nowadays, the 14" and 16" MacBook Pro's have the edge in both software and hardware. Taking a look at Apple's quarterly earning we see that Mac revenue are way ahead of iPad. It used to be around 1:1 but the Mac now brings home 11.5B vs 7.2B of iPad.

What can put iPad Pro ahead of the Mac again? The usual suspects are pro level apps like Final Cut Pro and Premiere, putting MacOS on the iPad and making a product that combines both Mac/iPad. I personally don't think any of these ideas will put the iPad ahead of the Mac. Most people have an iPhone. Purchasing the expensive iPad Pro's don't make sense for most people because the iPad and iPhone fundamentally do a lot of the same things. The 14" and 16" MacBooks are also very expensive but they offer something that iPhone does not. I think it's going to be difficult for Apple to bring the iPad Pro to a state where it's ahead of the Mac again. What do you guys think?

Apple stopped stating number of units sold in their financial statements.

Perhaps what increased their earnings is the increased margins Apple can earn from Macs since switching to their own chips?

Have you seen how expensive memory and storage upgrades cost?

 

[rkuo]

The counterpoint to that is that I don’t think we can have one device that makes for a great Mac and a great iPad. As the surface pro has demonstrated, something has to give (in its case, it was an okay laptop with a broken hinge, and a subpar tablet).

I am okay with owning both an iPad and a MacBook if it means I have a great tablet when I want one, and a great laptop when I need one. If Apple can somehow merge the two together with no compromises, I am all for it. But for the moment at least, I don’t think it’s possible, and I don’t think installing macOS on an iPad is the panacea everyone is making it out to be either.

If the iPad could flip to macOS, I think it would be a good laptop (and still an excellent tablet), assuming you have the Magic Keyboard of course. The only thing it’s really lacking is ports.

 

[ian87w]

I can see the OP's point.

In the past, Apple user has to choose between an ultra efficient hardware but in limited OS, the iPad, it a more robust desktop OS but running in a less efficient hardware (intel Mac). With the switch to Apple Silicon, the downside of Intel become nonexistent, especially when there's a fanless MacBook Air. And user still have access to the full macOS. User who wants portability, long battery life, and full desktop OS laptop don't need to compromise anymore, especially with the keyboard comes included.

Having said that, the iPad still has its place. The fact that Apple put such clear distinction (some might think limitation) on ipadOS means the iPad has never changed from its original intention. I actually am seeing more and more people, especially lay users who dislike/unfamiliar with traditional computer (especially those who are annoyed with Windows), leaning towards the iPad. It brings the familiar apps they have on their phones, but with a much larger screen and natural UI touch transition from smartphones. For them, spending $1500 is better spent on an ipad than a Mac that have unfamiliar UI and traditional desktop OS paradigm.

Transition to Apple Silicon benefits more for Mac users, while it changes nothing for iPad users. The uptick in Mac sales are probably people who are fed up with Intel, or those switching from Windows.

 

[JustAnExpat]

Before Apple Silicon on Mac, around the 2015-2019 time, iPad Pro had better software and hardware than the Mac and the Mac was seen as a legacy product, both by Apple themselves internally and the userbase. Nowadays, the 14" and 16" MacBook Pro's have the edge in both software and hardware. Taking a look at Apple's quarterly earning we see that Mac revenue are way ahead of iPad. It used to be around 1:1 but the Mac now brings home 11.5B vs 7.2B of iPad.

What can put iPad Pro ahead of the Mac again? The usual suspects are pro level apps like Final Cut Pro and Premiere, putting MacOS on the iPad and making a product that combines both Mac/iPad. I personally don't think any of these ideas will put the iPad ahead of the Mac. Most people have an iPhone. Purchasing the expensive iPad Pro's don't make sense for most people because the iPad and iPhone fundamentally do a lot of the same things. The 14" and 16" MacBooks are also very expensive but they offer something that iPhone does not. I think it's going to be difficult for Apple to bring the iPad Pro to a state where it's ahead of the Mac again. What do you guys think?

Please tell me this is a troll post:

1. the iPad Pro did not have better software than Mac OS from 2015 - 2019. The biggest problem with the iPads is the software - it was true then, and it's true now. You may be wearing rose color glasses though.
2. The Mac was NOT seen as a legacy product, and was never seen as a legacy product.
3. Very few people use Final Cut Pro and Premiere (all things considered). Most people use word processors, or Software As A Service.
4. Why must the iPad Pro be "ahead" of the Mac? The iPad Pro is a very niche product.

 

[Abazigal]

To the 12,9“ owners: what‘s your use case for such a huge tablet? I‘m really curious.

I found it nice for annotating on pdf documents in notability (replicates a sheet of A4 paper very nicely) or running two apps in split-screen mode. Unfortunately, it ended up being a little too unwieldy, and I would return it for the 11” iPad Pro instead.

 

[Marsikus]

What can put iPad Pro ahead of the Mac again?

But why? I began using Apple products in 2017, and in that moment it was like Apple is the IPhone company only, while Mac has been left behind. Thankfully, they fixed this situation. Apple is computer company first of all.

 

[teknikal90]

MacOS on Intel was not as fast, responsive and fluid as iPad Pro's around 2015-2019. The software was better optimised on iPad around that time.

this is totally not true.

 

[iPadified]

Another one of these thread... People do you have trouble understanding the difference between an apple and a carrot as well? Just because both can be used in cakes does not mean that they are interchangeable.

Moderators: please collect all these under the heading "I have no clue about the difference between an iPad and a Mac".

 

[bniu]

Apple had a lot of great plans for the mac, they just didn’t know how to do it with Intel’s processor roadmap. The 2015 Macbook was incredible, but it was hampered by Intel’s thermal constraints. The 2011 machines should’ve had USB 3.0, but Intel just had to drag their feet on integrating USB 3.0 support into their 2012 chipsets instead. The 2016 MacBook Pro redesign was made with the expectation of Intel meeting thermal constraints, which they did not, which led to a lot of thermal issues in that design.

It was just a matter of time before Apple could have a turbo charged version of the iPhone A-Series CPU ready to power a mac. After all, the A-Series CPUs have been running a derivative of MacOS for well over a decade when the first Apple Silicon mac came out.

 

[riverfreak]

I don't think legacy was the word but before Apple Silicon was announced, it really did seem as though Apple wanted the iPad Pro to replace the Mac notebook line. The Intel Macs were getting a little behind and macOS updates were not as polished as the had been in the past. I do think that we will continue to see convergence with macOS and iPadOS, StageManager on the Mac is a prime example of that happening.

Your conjecture is flawed. They didn’t initiate Apple Silicon the day it was announced. It was years and years in the planning and execution. They weren’t just twiddling their thumbs wondering what to do about the Mac.

 

[sunking101]

I don't think it "killed" the iPad Pro, but it's hard to muster spending upwards of $1000+ on an iPad Pro when you're already spending $1500+ on a quality MacBook if you need macOS to do your work. I have a 2018 11" iPad Pro that I still use, but if/when it dies on me I'll probably downgrade to one of the lower-cost iPads since I mostly just use it for web browsing / watching TV.

Yeah. I don’t see the point of owning an iPad Pro and a MacBook together. Get the MB and a lesser iPad, or the iPad Pro as a MB replacement.

 

[riverfreak]

To the 12,9“ owners: what‘s your use case for such a huge tablet? I‘m really curious.

Sheet music for piano. It’s awesome in that setting. I annotate scores with the Apple Pencil.

Editing photos after a trip.

I also find the iPadOS version of Numbers to be fantastic offering many unique features over non-touch based interfaces.

And it’s also a comfortable way to churn through non-actionable emails.

 

[Miha_v]

iPad and Mac have two different systems. You can do things on a Mac you simply can't do on an iPad (and vice versa). So I don't see how one could hurt the other. Sure, there is an overlap in posibillities and some people deciding either/or will buy either/or, not both.

 

[subjonas]

I disagree that iPad has better software than Mac and that the Mac was ever seen as a "legacy" product.

"Legacy" has a specific meaning, both in general usage but especially in tech. The term was never applicable to the Mac, and was never seen as such by Apple or by users.

I‘ve heard Macs and all desktop OS machines called “legacy” more than once in these forums by overzealous iPad enthusiasts haha. But they are likely a very small minority. And I haven’t heard from them since M1 Macs.
But yes, Apple has definitely never called Macs “legacy”. Nor could we conclude with any confidence that they ever thought of the Mac as legacy. Anyone making that conclusion is basing it off of overextrapolation from circumstantial evidence.

edit- I found someone who recently called Macs legacy! Although he/she doesn’t use the world “legacy” per se, and they might be trolling.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apple-silicon-on-the-mac-unintentionally-killed-the-ipad-pro.2369425/page-3?post=31715586#post-31715586

 

[subjonas]

My iPad Pro continues to provide me value and functionality that is *impossible* with any current Mac sold, so no. My iPad Pro is still ahead of any Mac available, in my eyes.

I think OP means “ahead” in the competition against Mac for revenue (although I don’t think Apple or most consumers actually considers it a competition).

 

[throAU]

I don’t’ think it killed it, but its not all bad for apple, the average sell price for a macbook is higher than the ipad.

Apple aren’t afraid to cannibalise their product line with new stuff, this is a good thing. If the new thing is better than the old thing then so be it.

That said, i think there’s still a market for the ipad pro.

 

[subjonas]

I've got to admit that handwriting does frequently attract me to the iPad, but I haven't yet been able to find a reason I'd want to give up the organic pleasure of writing on paper with a nice pen for a screen that poorly emulates it.

I envy you! Analog is always my immediate preference. I wish I could get away with it, but for my workflow, digital has too many advantages. I think it just depends on how often you need to write/draw, and your overall workflow, and how integrated it all needs to be.