iPad Apple's Forgotten Purpose: What Happened to the iPad's Original Intent?

[nj-morris]

Hey everyone,

I've been pondering over something lately, and I couldn't help but notice how Apple seems to have lost sight of the original purpose behind the iPad. Remember when it was positioned as the perfect middle ground between a computer and a laptop? A companion device, ideal for light work, school tasks, or on-the-go productivity?

But now, take a look at the current iPad lineup. The prices have skyrocketed, putting them in the range of high-end laptops, yet they can't even run a basic macOS. It's perplexing. Why invest in an iPad when you can get a more versatile and capable laptop for less?

Think about it: for illustrators, photographers, writers, and professionals alike, the iPad falls short in comparison to laptops. It lacks the flexibility and power needed for intensive tasks. Sure, it's great for consuming content or casual browsing, but when it comes to serious work, it just doesn't cut it anymore.

I miss the days when the iPad was a budget-friendly option for those who didn't need all the bells and whistles of a full-fledged computer but still wanted something more substantial than a smartphone. It's disheartening to see Apple prioritize profit margins over the original vision of the iPad.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you believe Apple should refocus on the iPad's roots and offer more affordable options that cater to productivity needs? Let's discuss.

That's not what the original aim of the iPad was at all. Take a look at these screenshots from the announcement of the first iPad (thanks 2010 for the 360p resolution):

The iPad wasn't meant as a miniaturised laptop. In fact Steve Jobs explicitly made a point of this by roasting netbooks, saying that they were just cheap laptops that run clunky PC software. If he were still alive, the idea of putting Mac OS, which has no considerations whatsoever around optimising it for tablet use, like so many people on MacRumors seem to want, he'd have a fit.

He didn't want the iPad to be a secondary device, he wanted it to be people's first choice for many tasks, namely the above ones, and in my opinion the iPad is still unambiguously better at these things than a phone (except music) and a laptop.

In a nutshell, he basically wanted it to be the perfect consumption device. And for millions of people it is. The aim of replacing a laptop only really came in the mid 10s when the iPad Pro came out, and that's still a work in progress. And as for affordability, as some have already pointed out, the base iPad, the spiritual successor to the original, is less than half the price of the original when it first came out, adjusted for inflation.

 

[williamofockham]

agreed jobs original concept was pretty damn good, I have both an iPad first generation, and iPad Air first generation other than some battery issues they are fine for ebooks and mail - what I purchased them for. when the battery in my air finally dies its time for a mini which has the more or less correct form factor for email and ebooks.

 

[I WAS the one]

The iPad wasn't meant as a miniaturised laptop.

My point exactly. Regular or Pro is still the same device. The price is ridiculous. You can do the same things in both. I have both!

 

[FeliApple]

The iPad’s original intent is still flawless. If an extreme minority pointlessly wants a Mac, that’s their mistaken prerogative.

But the iPad fits the companion and content consumption spot in a way no other device does.

 

[I WAS the one]

If you don't see the value in expensive models, then get the cheaper ones.

It's a rather misguided mindset, in my humble opinion. And it's not limited to Apple; it applies to every company out there. The same principle extends to car dealerships as well - they'll jack up the price just for a different color. It's ludicrous to think that a car with identical specifications can command a higher price simply because it has a coat of red paint. I find it frustrating and utterly disdainful when people willingly pay for such trivialities. It begs the question: what's next? Will we have to pay monthly fees for basic software or even for the privilege of listening to music? oh sh...

 

[I WAS the one]

The 13" iPad Air starts at $799, and probably will be often discounted at Amazon/Best Buy

Right now, upgrading from my iPad Pro 12.9 inches 2020 to the new iPad Air 13 inches 2024 would be an incredible deal! The new iPad Air will be five times more powerful than my current one.

 

[I WAS the one]

The just announced M4 iPad Pro with the latest tech starts at $999. Where are you getting this “$2000+” from? Do you live in Australia and use Australian dollars?

Just the Pencil and the Magic Keyboard Case won't cut it with $2000, my friend. In American currency, $999 will only get you a glass to tap with your fingers like a monkey in a lab.

 

[darngooddesign]

…I miss the days when the iPad was a budget-friendly option for those who didn't need all the bells and whistles of a full-fledged computer but still wanted something more substantial than a smartphone. It's disheartening to see Apple prioritize profit margins over the original vision of the iPad.

iPad 1 $500

iPad 10 $350

 

[KPOM]

Just the Pencil and the Magic Keyboard Case won't cut it with $2000, my friend. In American currency, $999 will only get you a glass to tap with your fingers like a monkey in a lab.

Not everyone needs the Magic Keyboard or the Pencil. And there are third party alternatives for both.

 

[sparksd]

It's a rather misguided mindset, in my humble opinion. And it's not limited to Apple; it applies to every company out there. The same principle extends to car dealerships as well - they'll jack up the price just for a different color. It's ludicrous to think that a car with identical specifications can command a higher price simply because it has a coat of red paint. I find it frustrating and utterly disdainful when people willingly pay for such trivialities. It begs the question: what's next? Will we have to pay monthly fees for basic software or even for the privilege of listening to music? oh sh...

Charging what the market will bear is pretty standard practice. These aren't devices or services that you're forced to buy.

 

[gnomeisland]

I want to share my perspective with you so that you can better understand where I'm coming from. My daughter uses an iPad 9, while I have an iPad Pro 12.9 2020. The primary disparity lies in the screen quality and size; otherwise, both devices operate on the same iOS and support identical apps. Among the applications I utilize are LumaFusion, Cubasis 4, Affinity Suite, Textastic, Procreate, Nomad 3D Sculpt, along with Office 365 suite and various productivity tools like Gladys, Notability, Documents, and Timemator.

These apps perform reasonably well on both the iPad 9 and the Pro. Occasionally, I do experience some lag on the iPad 9, particularly when handling audio and 3D tasks, but it's not significant enough to hinder my workflow. Charging $2000 solely for a larger screen feels disrespectful, especially when considering that the internal specifications, such as processors or GPU performance, aren't fully leveraged without macOS. It's akin to putting an airplane engine in a Prius—impressive on paper, but impractical in practice. So, what does "Pro" stand for in this context? It seems to denote features that professionals may theoretically need but can't effectively utilize in this environment.

It's a bit of a stretch, isn't it? Just to clarify: I invested $1500 in my iPad Pro and $500 in the iPad 9 (mainly for additional storage), while its standard price was $329. Frankly, I fail to see the advantages of my iPad Pro purchase. It seems like they've overlooked the fundamental purpose of the iPad. If they're going to label it as "Pro," they might as well include macOS functionality.

Ok, that's your experience but it isn't universal. I also bought my daughter an iPad (mini, A12—don't remember the generation, I believe the last one with a home button). I noticed a difference when I owned a 2018 iPad Pro (A12X) and it feel worlds apart compared to my M1 iPad Pro. My 2021 iPad Pro is so much faster, smoother, and capable. Does she need that power? No. Do I need that power for every task? No. But the same could be said for my M1 Max Mac Studio I have in my office. When I do need it—for both the Studio and the iPadPro—it makes a real difference. 90% of the time, operationally it feels the same as the lesser model. Which is really amazing if you don't need the additional "pro" features which it sounds like you don't. You can save so much and get the some experience doing what you need to do!

I really don't understand the vitriol against the iPad Pro. If it isn't for you and you don't see the need and won't use the power, then . . . fine. Don't buy it?

Apple's upcharges are ridiculous but I don't think the pricing overall is "disrespectful" because there are so many competent options at so many different price points. It may seem inconceivable to you but I prefer iPadOS for most of my computing tasks (would be all but there are several software packages I need for work that are still Mac-only) and I do have regular iPad tasks that push an M1 with 16GB of RAM.

 

[Abazigal]

Hey everyone,

I've been pondering over something lately, and I couldn't help but notice how Apple seems to have lost sight of the original purpose behind the iPad. Remember when it was positioned as the perfect middle ground between a computer and a laptop? A companion device, ideal for light work, school tasks, or on-the-go productivity?

But now, take a look at the current iPad lineup. The prices have skyrocketed, putting them in the range of high-end laptops, yet they can't even run a basic macOS. It's perplexing. Why invest in an iPad when you can get a more versatile and capable laptop for less?

Think about it: for illustrators, photographers, writers, and professionals alike, the iPad falls short in comparison to laptops. It lacks the flexibility and power needed for intensive tasks. Sure, it's great for consuming content or casual browsing, but when it comes to serious work, it just doesn't cut it anymore.

I miss the days when the iPad was a budget-friendly option for those who didn't need all the bells and whistles of a full-fledged computer but still wanted something more substantial than a smartphone. It's disheartening to see Apple prioritize profit margins over the original vision of the iPad.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you believe Apple should refocus on the iPad's roots and offer more affordable options that cater to productivity needs? Let's discuss.

My opinion is that Apple hasn't forgotten the iPad's original purpose; just that it has been outlived.

When Steve Jobs debuted the iPad, I believe that he always intended for it to be a simplified version of computing for the general masses. And when you think about what most people use a computer for - it's to access the internet. So it didn't mean that they necessarily needed the full functionality of a PC, just the internet.

So you have this giant iPod touch that let you browse the internet, read emails, watch videos, perform light productivity tasks, and maybe that's all it really needed to be. Instead, we have keyboard attachments that turn the iPad into a makeshift laptop, we have external display support, and I am not sure who are the people who hook up their laptops to 27" displays and work off that exactly.

I also don't understand what you mean by the iPad not being affordable when you have the iPad 10 and iPad Air being comparable in price. You may not be getting the best of the best, but the M2 chip isn't any slouch either.

 

[darngooddesign]

My opinion is that Apple hasn't forgotten the iPad's original purpose; just that it has been outlived.

When Steve Jobs debuted the iPad, I believe that he always intended for it to be a simplified version of computing for the general masses. And when you think about what most people use a computer for - it's to access the internet. So it didn't mean that they necessarily needed the full functionality of a PC, just the internet.

So you have this giant iPod touch that let you browse the internet, read emails, watch videos, perform light productivity tasks, and maybe that's all it really needed to be. Instead, we have keyboard attachments that turn the iPad into a makeshift laptop, we have external display support, and I am not sure who are the people who hook up their laptops to 27" displays and work off that exactly.

I also don't understand what you mean by the iPad not being affordable when you have the iPad 10 and iPad Air being comparable in price. You may not be getting the best of the best, but the M2 chip isn't any slouch either.

And let's not forget that Apple released a portrait orientation keyboard in 2010 because SJ realized it was good for some work like writing.

 

[menist]

I think the iPad was meant to be the all in one tablet and personal computer. It turned into a device that raised/babysit the new generations of kids.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

The iPad’s original intent is still flawless. If an extreme minority pointlessly wants a Mac, that’s their mistaken prerogative.

But the iPad fits the companion and content consumption spot in a way no other device does.

Sorry but Mac users are not some "extreme minority pointlessly wants a Mac." They are simply different devices with some overlaps.

 

[FeliApple]

Sorry but Mac users are not some "extreme minority pointlessly wants a Mac." They are simply different devices with some overlaps.

I didn’t mean Mac users. I meant users who want the iPad to be obliterated by replacing iPadOS with MacOS.

I’m a Mac user myself.

 

[teohyc]

It's a rather misguided mindset, in my humble opinion. And it's not limited to Apple; it applies to every company out there. The same principle extends to car dealerships as well - they'll jack up the price just for a different color. It's ludicrous to think that a car with identical specifications can command a higher price simply because it has a coat of red paint. I find it frustrating and utterly disdainful when people willingly pay for such trivialities. It begs the question: what's next? Will we have to pay monthly fees for basic software or even for the privilege of listening to music? oh sh...

Why is it misguided?

If you see value in the limited edition red, then buy it. If not skip it.

People have different interpretation of value. Those who earn median income will have a different set of beliefs regarding spending money compared to those who earn under or above median income.

That's why Apple has so many iPad models.

If a customer wants to spend $400, there is an iPad for them.

If a customer wants to spend $2000, there is also an iPad for them. Not having the $2000 model means Apple is denying themselves to earn from that customer.

 

[Macalicious2011]

What are your thoughts on this? Do you believe Apple should refocus on the iPad's roots and offer more affordable options that cater to productivity needs? Let's discuss.

The best ipad are air or pro that are 2-4 years old.


They cost 200-400. You get the same OS as the latest models, pencil support and future proof specs without spending $600-1000.

 

[Arctic Moose]

Your first point isn’t a limitation of iOS/iPadOS though. No amount of new features, save for emulation, is going to allow the iPad to run an application that just wasn’t built for it.

But it is.

I run Windows 11 virtualized on my M3 Mac, which in turn has dealt successfully with every x86 and x64 app I have thrown at it.

The only reason I cannot do this on my iPad is that Apple doesn’t allow it.

 

[0339327]

The original iPad was priced at $499 in 2010 (~$750 today). You can now get a 10th gen device for $349 in 2024.

This is reverse inflation despite the dollar being worth much less today.

Now I do agree that the iPad Air should replace the basic iPad and be reduced to $499. Apple is maximizing profits for those who want something better than the basic unit, just like they do with everything from ram to hard drives: and that, I agree, is classic Apple greed.

 

[masotime]

I find it frustrating and utterly disdainful when people willingly pay for such trivialities.

Is this an attempt to pass judgement on how people should spend their money?

It begs the question: what's next? Will we have to pay monthly fees for basic software or even for the privilege of listening to music? oh sh...

For “basic software” and “listening to music” there are options like e.g. Affinity Photo over Photoshop, using the radio / buying on iTunes over Apple Music. Even Spotify has an ad supported tier.

I’m not even sure how this is related to the iPad Pro. Apple has provided more affordable options, why fixate on the iPad Pro? In your own words

Regular or Pro is still the same device.

Then why does the price of the Pro matter to you?

Is this whole thread really just a roundabout way to say that you are unhappy you can’t afford the latest iPad tech, and you think Apple is using the “Pro” moniker to make the latest iPad tech out of reach of your budget?

 

[Rogifan]

That's not what the original aim of the iPad was at all. Take a look at these screenshots from the announcement of the first iPad (thanks 2010 for the 360p resolution):

View attachment 2376318
View attachment 2376319
The iPad wasn't meant as a miniaturised laptop. In fact Steve Jobs explicitly made a point of this by roasting netbooks, saying that they were just cheap laptops that run clunky PC software. If he were still alive, the idea of putting Mac OS, which has no considerations whatsoever around optimising it for tablet use, like so many people on MacRumors seem to want, he'd have a fit.

He didn't want the iPad to be a secondary device, he wanted it to be people's first choice for many tasks, namely the above ones, and in my opinion the iPad is still unambiguously better at these things than a phone (except music) and a laptop.

In a nutshell, he basically wanted it to be the perfect consumption device. And for millions of people it is. The aim of replacing a laptop only really came in the mid 10s when the iPad Pro came out, and that's still a work in progress. And as for affordability, as some have already pointed out, the base iPad, the spiritual successor to the original, is less than half the price of the original when it first came out, adjusted for inflation.

The issue is the iPad Pro and as I’ve said elsewhere I think even inside Apple they’re unclear about why it exists. The thing is if you’re going to create an incredibly powerful iPad with a nice, big, beautiful display and nice keyboard people will want to use it for more than just consumption. Honestly Apple should get iPad Pro’s biggest power users in a room to tell them what iPadOS needs to make the iPad Pro better. Do a listening session similar to what the did with the Mac after the trash can Mac Pro debacle.

 

[Rogifan]

My opinion is that Apple hasn't forgotten the iPad's original purpose; just that it has been outlived.

When Steve Jobs debuted the iPad, I believe that he always intended for it to be a simplified version of computing for the general masses. And when you think about what most people use a computer for - it's to access the internet. So it didn't mean that they necessarily needed the full functionality of a PC, just the internet.

So you have this giant iPod touch that let you browse the internet, read emails, watch videos, perform light productivity tasks, and maybe that's all it really needed to be. Instead, we have keyboard attachments that turn the iPad into a makeshift laptop, we have external display support, and I am not sure who are the people who hook up their laptops to 27" displays and work off that exactly.

I also don't understand what you mean by the iPad not being affordable when you have the iPad 10 and iPad Air being comparable in price. You may not be getting the best of the best, but the M2 chip isn't any slouch either.

It’s the iPad Pro that is confusing. It feels like on the Mac side people know why they need a MacBook Pro, Mac Studio, Mac Pro and everyone else gets a MacBook Air or Mac mini. The iPad Pro is less clear. Maybe if there was more pro-level, desktop class software that was optimized for iPad Pro the story would be clearer. I said this elsewhere but I think Apple should hold a round table like they did with the Mac (after the trash can Mac Pro didn’t pan out) and ask iPad power users what they’d like to see. Maybe there is something Apple can do specifically with iPad Pro that doesn’t affect the iPads for the masses. So you’re not over complicating grandma’s $329 iPad to make the $1299 iPad Pro better able to utilize the power it has.

 

[FeliApple]

It’s the iPad Pro that is confusing. It feels like on the Mac side people know why they need a MacBook Pro, Mac Studio, Mac Pro and everyone else gets a MacBook Air or Mac mini. The iPad Pro is less clear. Maybe if there was more pro-level, desktop class software that was optimized for iPad Pro the story would be clearer. I said this elsewhere but I think Apple should hold a round table like they did with the Mac (after the trash can Mac Pro didn’t pan out) and ask iPad power users what they’d like to see. Maybe there is something Apple can do specifically with iPad Pro that doesn’t affect the iPads for the masses. So you’re not over complicating grandma’s $329 iPad to make the $1299 iPad Pro better able to utilize the power it has.

“Pro” has always been a marketing term. People, with the advent of the M1, started to misinterpret this. But Pro means quad speakers, screen features, and it used to mean a P3 display. Nothing else.

 

[nj-morris]

The issue is the iPad Pro and as I’ve said elsewhere I think even inside Apple they’re unclear about why it exists. The thing is if you’re going to create an incredibly powerful iPad with a nice, big, beautiful display and nice keyboard people will want to use it for more than just consumption. Honestly Apple should get iPad Pro’s biggest power users in a room to tell them what iPadOS needs to make the iPad Pro better. Do a listening session similar to what the did with the Mac after the trash can Mac Pro debacle.

Yeah by all means, I'm all for Apple listening to feedback more. But I'd argue that what an iPad excels in is not necessarily limited to consumption. Take a look at your average desk job for example, where the main tasks you want to be able to do include things like video conferencing, checking and writing emails, browsing the internet, taking notes or using Microsoft Office. And all those tasks most people can do just as well, if not better, on an iPad with a keyboard than with a laptop.

“Pro” has always been a marketing term. People, with the advent of the M1, started to misinterpret this. But Pro means quad speakers, screen features, and it used to mean a P3 display. Nothing else.

Funny thing about it is that the iPhone has also had the "Pro" brand for years, and nobody ever complains about not being able to run Mac OS or do heavy video editing on an iPhone Pro.