How Apple will integrate Mac and iPad

[Velli]

OK, full disclaimer, this thread is just guesswork - just fun and games. But...

I have been thinking about why Apple included iOS app support in M1 macs. It is very unlike Apple to include such a “just because we can” feature, with no real thought behind the “why”. It’s all but useless for the most obvious use case (streaming video), and just in general seem very haphazardly pieced together. So, why did this feature get out of alpha?

It seems obvious this is a beta feature, destined for a future life that we don’t see yet. Most people saw it as a sign that we will get touch Macs in the future, especially in the light of the Big Sur design changes. I don’t think so. I think it is a beta for Mac apps running on iPad Pro.

Here is how I see the future product differentiation:

iPad: As today: Touch based, low price, iPhone processor, Lightning connector. Runs iOS apps only.

Macbook air etc: M1, few connectors, USB-C, no touch

Macbook Pro etc: M1X, more connectors, USB-C, no touch

iPad Pro: Touch first with keyboard/mouse support, M1 (maybe labelled 14X etc still, but essentially M1), USB-C, external monitor support, runs both iOS and Mac apps natively.

Essentially iPhone and iPad are the consumption devices, they use Lightning because they are in mindset peripherals, not “core” computers. They use mobile class CPU. iPhone run iPhone apps only. iPad runs iPhone and iPad apps, but not Mac apps.

Macs and iPad Pros are the production devices, they use USB-C. Macs for the traditional, non-touch based setups, iPad Pro for the touch-first, versatile setups. They both use “Mac class” Apple Silicon. They both run iOS and Mac apps.

This leaves us with essentially three Apple Silicon CPU classes: Mobile, Mac, and Mac Pro:

Mobile class:
iPhone
iPad/iPad Air

Mac class:
Macbook Air
Mac Mini
iPad Pro
Small iMac

Mac Pro class:
Macbook Pro
Large iMac
Mac Pro “mini”

Open question on large Mac Pro

In this way, Apple can elegantly provide a “Mac with Touch”, without actually making the product they said they will never make, a Mac with touch...

I don’t necessarily think we will see the full step this thursday, but at least at WWDC we will see more movement in this direction, if not the actual announcement of a beta phase of Mac apps running on iPad Pro.

Am I way off?

 

[jdb8167]

I don't have an opinion on most of what you wrote but I have been thinking about macOS on a new iPad Pro model. Current models aren't really viable with at most 6 GB of RAM and other problems. As you say, Apple could put an M1 on a new model iPad Pro. That means that they could have virtualization support which current Ax mobile SoCs don't have.

With that virtualization they could virtualize macOS with iPadOS as the host and keep it within a constrained sandbox separate from the iPadOS walled garden. File system access would be a single directory just like every other iPadOS application but with as many sub-folders as desired. It would allow access to iCloud and the Thunderbolt/USB4 connector using normal virtualization of hardware.

Do I think Apple might do this? No not really or least not in the near term. But it would give the iPad Pro a competitive solution to the Windows 2 in 1 laptops and Surface like tablets. And it seems like with the hypervisor Apple has already working in macOS (Aarch64 Darwin), it would be relatively easy to do. I ran macOS in VMWare Fusion for years on the Intel Mac platform. It certainly worked adequately and with Apple support it would actually be better than VMWare. There is no need to customize macOS for touch either. MacOS support would mostly only be useful in the context of a keyboard and trackpad/mouse.

 

[Gnattu]

In this way, Apple can elegantly provide a “Mac with Touch”, without actually making the product they said they will never make, a Mac with touch...

I don't get it. If iPads runs Mac Apps then it is a "Mac with Touch".

 

[velocityg4]

I think the main driving force is to get more software under control of the app store. Up till now developers had to choose developing for macOS, iOS/iPad OS or both. If they are unsure if iPad users will use their program. They'll skip developing an iPad OS version. Now they can develop for both in one fell swoop. Just having to make UI changes for the Mac an iPad version. This'll make it more tempting to develop a universal program. Unless their program violates app store rules.

Next is to make the Mac more appealing to people who don't have Macs. The idea being eventually people will have access to all iOS apps. Where there are quite a few with no Mac counterpart.

This would give the Mac access to a wide range of games. That's just one aspect.
- Secure banking apps
- Dedicated messaging apps
- Language learning apps
- Social networking apps
- Really anything that exists as a dedicated app. But only available on a website on the Mac.

 

[xraydoc]

I think the main driving force is to get more software under control of the app store. Up till now developers had to choose developing for macOS, iOS/iPad OS or both. If they are unsure if iPad users will use their program. They'll skip developing an iPad OS version. Now they can develop for both in one fell swoop. Just having to make UI changes for the Mac an iPad version. This'll make it more tempting to develop a universal program. Unless their program violates app store rules.

There's a number of apps that already do this. GoodNotes is one I can think of. Runs on iPhone, iPad & Mac. It could use a few tweaks to the Mac UI, but otherwise is a pretty universal app.

 

[Velli]

I don't get it. If iPads runs Mac Apps then it is a "Mac with Touch".

Does that make the M1 Macs iPads without touch?

 

[Bodhitree]

I don’t think they will integrate the product lines, it is against their interests as Apple would make less profit that way. I think they are more likely to put more effort into getting iPad to work side-by-side with a Mac, increasing the total value proposition and thus selling more of both.

The reason for iOS apps on Mac is probably to fill some gaps in the ecosystem, after all the iPhone App Store is dominant in software in a way that the mac is not. Chromebooks got a nice boost from having Android apps available on the platform, why wouldn’t Apple do the same thing?

 

[Velli]

I don’t think they will integrate the product lines, it is against their interests as Apple would make less profit that way. I think they are more likely to put more effort into getting iPad to work side-by-side with a Mac, increasing the total value proposition and thus selling more of both.

The reason for iOS apps on Mac is probably to fill some gaps in the ecosystem, after all the iPhone App Store is dominant in software in a way that the mac is not. Chromebooks got a nice boost from having Android apps available on the platform, why wouldn’t Apple do the same thing?

I still think the iPad Pro needs more diversification from the normal iPad, more than Macs need iPad apps. Especially with as crappy an execution as we see now. I don’t think they will merge iPad and Mac per se, I think they will try to create a third scenario. Which would be a much more Apple-like thing to do.

 

[imdropbear]

I don’t think they will integrate the product lines, it is against their interests as Apple would make less profit that way. I think they are more likely to put more effort into getting iPad to work side-by-side with a Mac, increasing the total value proposition and thus selling more of both.

The reason for iOS apps on Mac is probably to fill some gaps in the ecosystem, after all the iPhone App Store is dominant in software in a way that the mac is not. Chromebooks got a nice boost from having Android apps available on the platform, why wouldn’t Apple do the same thing?

I don't want iOS Apps on Macs, I want Mac Apps on iOS. I do hope they make macOS accessible for the iPad Pro eventually and Apple Silicon should definitely make this easy in theory. The question just is, do they really want that? I hope yes, I think no.

 

[Chancha]

Mac apps entails running macOS exclusive libraries, using API/UI designed for macOS, and most probably requires an open file system or at least the file management aspects of it. If an iPad (and by association the iPadOS) were to enable these, you may as well call such a device a "touch based Mac".

 

[imdropbear]

Mac apps entails running macOS exclusive libraries, using API/UI designed for macOS, and most probably requires an open file system or at least the file management aspects of it. If an iPad (and by association the iPadOS) were to enable these, you may as well call such a device a "touch based Mac".

Which is *exactly* what I want. I want the ability to - optionally and additionally to iOS - install macOS on an iPad Pro and be able to switch without too much effort between the iOS and the macOS workflow, depending on the situation. Just imagine having an iPad Pro with iOS that has the ability to just be docked in for a full macOS experience. I wouldn't even necessarily need the touch functionality (but I see that Apple would never do it without it).

But again, that's just what I dream about at night, I realise this is probably not the path Apple wants to take.

 

[Chancha]

To be honest I also crave such a device, but for different reasons. I quite like the M1 Air that I have, it replaces my previous 13" MBP (or even 15" I used before) due to it being powerful enough while still somewhat light and small. But the formfactor of my 10.5" iPad Pro cannot be beaten when on the road, needing to have something presentable, or just in general hassle or tight space situation where holding a laptop with one arm is just embarrassing. The iPadOS is great for what it is but it is nowhere close to the productivity I can get from macOS, for its openness and multi-tasking ability.

I am unsure what the exact resistance Apple has for creating and selling such a device. If the Surface line of products are to be referenced, you can say a hybrid between two different interfacing approaches are at best a compromise, and at worst crippling for both. But at least MS is willing to roll such a product line out for actual people using it before deeming it not worth the effort like Apple does. With the MBP and iPad Pro that I have, both are optimized machines for their given roles, and I also have an iMac for heavy duty and permanent local data management. I would be nice if can condense the 2 mobile machines into one, regardless if it compromises some part of what was possible with either/both devices, since the reduced bulk is always welcomed when we talk about portable computing.

 

[Bodhitree]

I’m sure Apple will have done their research and looked at how many of those hybrid Surface laptops were being sold by Microsoft. In the past Apple have not shied away from cannibalising their own past products in order to bring something better to the market, look at what the iPhone did to the iPod. But perhaps they see the iPad market as something that is still developing.

 

[Velli]

After mulling over the arguments, I’m going to make a Super League-speed about face here: I have been convinced that Mac apps will not come to iPad. The strategy will be to push the publishers to make apps designed for iPad Pro first, that then inherently also work on Macs, rather than build for Mac first and then try to convert it into iPad. So as a mindset, rather than thinking of the iPad Pro as a Mac with touch, we should learn to think of a Mac as an iPad Pro without touch.

They did choose to brand the CPU in the new iPad Pro’s M1, which fits with the mindset that they want to create a split line between consumption devices with A-series chips (iPhone, iPad, Apple TV), and production devices (iPad Pro, Mac).