iPad Pro If we don't get Final Cut for the M1 iPad Pro at WWDC, I am closing the book on this experiment.

[Zdigital2015]

Sensible, and I agree. Why put a first-class "computer chip" inside an iPad... when you won't have apps taking advantage of that cpu power.

But in Apple's defense, you realize it takes time to optimize a complex app like Final Cut to AS. Would you be satisfied if Apple announced "Yes, Final Cut for M1 iPad Pros... we're working on it now, it's just not ready to release yet."

The Final Cut team couldn’t get to that kind of overhaul in the past 4 years, or even 7 since the first iPad Pro was introduced? They have a version of iMovie for the iPad and have forever. The horsepower is certainly there, what’s Apple’s hold up? Certainly, LumaFusion could still stay viable in the iOS market even if FCP made it to the iPad, could it not? Apple lacks commitment in the most unusual of places. FCP and Logic for iPadOS should be Express versions, at least that would give us a subset to work with and help personnel outside the direct editing/creating process collaborate. I suppose that those sort of holistic solutions don’t have enough appeal to fatten Apple’s Services division, but I digress.

 

[theotherphil]

Sometimes, form is function, especially when it comes to a mobile device you are going to hold and bring around with you. In this context, a thinner and lighter device is a more portable and a more useable device.

Exactly this. I work in emergency services management - specifically the largest EMS system in the Southern Hemisphere. I am provided with a work windows laptop, but when leaving the office and I am mobile supporting my staff, I use my BYOD 12.9 IPP.

I can access all of the work systems using per app VPN, battery life is amazing, instant-on, wipe clean form factor and the screen quality blows away my crappy windows laptop (and dual 1080p desktop monitors). Office 365 integrates amazingly well, as does Teams (which is hilarious given it's a resource hog on windows). The tablet form factor is much nicer to use in an SUV or back of an ambulance.

I can easily replace the windows laptop for my day job but I would struggle to replace my iPad. Outside of work, my IPP gets more use than my 14" MBP - by a significant amount. But, there are tasks that are just easier on a desktop style setup and for that, I use my MBP with 4k external monitor.

I don't want a single device to rule them all because as we have seen with the surface line, there are just too many compromises....the surface is a mediocre laptop and a mediocre tablet.

The iPad is the best tablet and the M1 MBP's are the best laptops. Just because something is possible, it doesn't mean we need to do it if it leads to a compromised user experience and here is a prime example:

Touchscreen laptops. Let's be honest, they suck. They are heavier, thicker, have 2-3hrs worse battery life, cost more and generally have worse resolution. Coupled with all the research that shows that they are an ergonomic nightmare and the vast majority of users never actually use them as a touchscreen, you've got to ask yourself why? Why are there so many people that are vocal about MacBooks not having a touchscreen when every metric shows that they suck?

The answer is, the general population don't look at the research - ergonomics, battery life, function, usage data etc. They just look at what everybody else has and go:

Thankfully Apple looks at the data and gives people a great user experience despite the above minority of vocal users wanting to compromise the user experience for the majority.

 

[rui no onna]

Touchscreen laptops. Let's be honest, they suck. They are heavier, thicker, have 2-3hrs worse battery life, cost more and generally have worse resolution. Coupled with all the research that shows that they are an ergonomic nightmare and the vast majority of users never actually use them as a touchscreen, you've got to ask yourself why? Why are there so many people that are vocal about MacBooks not having a touchscreen when every metric shows that they suck?

The answer is, the general population don't look at the research - ergonomics, battery life, function, usage data etc. They just look at what everybody else has and go:

It’s mostly the tech bloggers and YouTubers who complain. I don’t believe the general population really cares much. Going by what’s available for sale, there’s a lot more non-touchscreen laptops sold than touchscreen ones.

Although in all fairness, I expect M1 MacBooks with touchscreen wouldn’t have the same battery life issues as x86-based Windows laptops.

 

[Digitalguy]

Exactly this. I work in emergency services management - specifically the largest EMS system in the Southern Hemisphere. I am provided with a work windows laptop, but when leaving the office and I am mobile supporting my staff, I use my BYOD 12.9 IPP.

I can access all of the work systems using per app VPN, battery life is amazing, instant-on, wipe clean form factor and the screen quality blows away my crappy windows laptop (and dual 1080p desktop monitors). Office 365 integrates amazingly well, as does Teams (which is hilarious given it's a resource hog on windows). The tablet form factor is much nicer to use in an SUV or back of an ambulance.

I can easily replace the windows laptop for my day job but I would struggle to replace my iPad. Outside of work, my IPP gets more use than my 14" MBP - by a significant amount. But, there are tasks that are just easier on a desktop style setup and for that, I use my MBP with 4k external monitor.

I don't want a single device to rule them all because as we have seen with the surface line, there are just too many compromises....the surface is a mediocre laptop and a mediocre tablet.

The iPad is the best tablet and the M1 MBP's are the best laptops. Just because something is possible, it doesn't mean we need to do it if it leads to a compromised user experience and here is a prime example:

Touchscreen laptops. Let's be honest, they suck. They are heavier, thicker, have 2-3hrs worse battery life, cost more and generally have worse resolution. Coupled with all the research that shows that they are an ergonomic nightmare and the vast majority of users never actually use them as a touchscreen, you've got to ask yourself why? Why are there so many people that are vocal about MacBooks not having a touchscreen when every metric shows that they suck?

The answer is, the general population don't look at the research - ergonomics, battery life, function, usage data etc. They just look at what everybody else has and go:

View attachment 2013492

Thankfully Apple looks at the data and gives people a great user experience despite the above minority of vocal users wanting to compromise the user experience for the majority.

Lot's of assumptions here.
M1 MBP are the best laptops? It all depends on priorities. For me, for instance, a great keyboard and cellular is more important than the additional battery life (as long as I have a good one) and raw power. Weight is also an important consideration.
You are assuming that those who like to have a touch Windows laptop are using it as a tablet. Many already have an iPad or other tablet for that. Touch is just an additional input (generally a secondary one) that can be pleasant in some situations. There is no ergonomic nightmare, you have keyboard and trackpad. And, some touchscreens allow pen input, which is great for annotating, for instance.

 

[imnotthewalrus]

I would think that a viable on the go audio production rig using an iPad Pro might want to include an Apple Magic keyboard to keep the beast powered through its “dumb” USB-C port and using the Apple USB-C to 3.5mm dongle for the headphones. Or possibly just a decent USB-C dock to be able to handle power and audio.

Or if you’re using a USB microphone, the headphones plug-in to most USB mics. What I’m saying is that the lack of the microphone jack certainly isn’t at the top of list for making the iPad Pro viable as an audio production rig. How iPadOS handles capturing multiple disparate incoming streams of audio is the bigger issue for Apple to address now, right? Or is it just me?

A USB mic isn't the issue for me - it's plugging in my guitar or bass and having/needing
a headphone jack. I have found the solution in an Apogee Jam+ interface that includes the necessary headphone jack, and I'm happy with it. $179 later happy with it. If the iPad Pro had a 3.5 jack like the cheap $329 model, it wouldn't be an issue to me if the cheapest iPad was better equipped for a musician than a so-called "pro" iPad. I'm fine. I don't even own an IPP... Just blowing off steam, as I wouldn't mind owning an IPP when I'm ready for an upgrade, but I might just stick with the iPad Air...
End of rant.
Peace out

 

[lrsone]

Photoshop users aren't particularly happy with the limited iPad version. They want the full application.

I agree with this. Having Photoshop on my iPad is great for really quick minimal edits of some photography but the iPadOS version is far from perfect. And is missing a lot of other basic functions that the desktop version has, making it hard to use and not as user friendly and fun.

 

[iPadified]

Exactly this. I work in emergency services management - specifically the largest EMS system in the Southern Hemisphere. I am provided with a work windows laptop, but when leaving the office and I am mobile supporting my staff, I use my BYOD 12.9 IPP.

I can access all of the work systems using per app VPN, battery life is amazing, instant-on, wipe clean form factor and the screen quality blows away my crappy windows laptop (and dual 1080p desktop monitors). Office 365 integrates amazingly well, as does Teams (which is hilarious given it's a resource hog on windows). The tablet form factor is much nicer to use in an SUV or back of an ambulance.

I can easily replace the windows laptop for my day job but I would struggle to replace my iPad. Outside of work, my IPP gets more use than my 14" MBP - by a significant amount. But, there are tasks that are just easier on a desktop style setup and for that, I use my MBP with 4k external monitor.

I don't want a single device to rule them all because as we have seen with the surface line, there are just too many compromises....the surface is a mediocre laptop and a mediocre tablet.

The iPad is the best tablet and the M1 MBP's are the best laptops. Just because something is possible, it doesn't mean we need to do it if it leads to a compromised user experience and here is a prime example:

Touchscreen laptops. Let's be honest, they suck. They are heavier, thicker, have 2-3hrs worse battery life, cost more and generally have worse resolution. Coupled with all the research that shows that they are an ergonomic nightmare and the vast majority of users never actually use them as a touchscreen, you've got to ask yourself why? Why are there so many people that are vocal about MacBooks not having a touchscreen when every metric shows that they suck?

The answer is, the general population don't look at the research - ergonomics, battery life, function, usage data etc. They just look at what everybody else has and go:

View attachment 2013492

Thankfully Apple looks at the data and gives people a great user experience despite the above minority of vocal users wanting to compromise the user experience for the majority.

I really love these examples of when computing is far from office. I find it sad that mostly desk bound workflow like coding and video editing get so large focus regarding the the iPads (lack of) capabilities.

When I was working with main frames there was a pecking order: mainframes were the real computers, PC was interesting but with unclear use case professionally, Mac was not even on the radar - a real computer has a prompt. At Mac rumors there is a certain pecking order as well: Those with custom adapted Mac Pros for coding and video editing are the highest self proclaimed gods and then those using the iPad for work who according to gods knows nothing of computing.

I would appreciate that all of us had a more open attitude to each other’s professions and corresponding computing needs.

 

[Brien]

The ipad is “pro” only in relative terms… the ipad pro is still an ipad.

Only because Apple limits it so.

 

[AppliedMicro]

That Apple still has several friction points left to eradicate speaks to how thinly stretched the OS dev teams are at Apple given that the have three major operating systems being updated on an annual basis.

Creative (re-) branding attempts aside, iOS and iPadOS are the (still!) very same thing. With only minuscule differences.

Imagine a world in which iPads and tablet computer hadn't been a thing for the last 12 years or so. And Apple was developing new, bigger handheld multitouch devices - AKA "tablets" - and a new OS that were something of a "middle ground" between iPhones and Macs. Well, the current iPadOS looks and feels as if someone at Apple said: "Let's take iOS, blow up the screen a bit, show two apps side-by-side and slide in things from left, right or a corner, to create an illusion of multitasking! That's all we need, innit? Piece of cake!"

That's of course what iPadOS evolved from and what it still feels today.
It doesn't feel like a "third" major operating syste,

No, there's only two major OS: macOS and iOS.
And iPadOS very much feels like a small remix (if not sorry afterthought and leftover) from the latter.

Now, I'm not saying it's necessarily bad thing to depart much from the iOS user interface and its paradigms. They've been well received and the iPad is a great "oversized companion" product to iPhones. But...

Thankfully Apple looks at the data and gives people a great user experience despite the above minority of vocal users wanting to compromise the user experience for the majority.

What's baffling though is the amount of R&D and computing power they're putting they've spent to put laptop-/desktop-class processors into the Pro tablets. And the logistics to make that a separate (iPad Pro) product line - which I have little doubt that only a tiny minority is purchasing. And on top of that has a ridiculous amount of overlap in the 11" screen bracket (iPad Air and 11" Pro).

It almost feels like a design study in CPU/GPU efficiency, performance and thermal management ("how far can we take this architecture to close the gap to desktop-class SoC?"). And a very successful one at that. Even more so in hindsight, where these SoC design actually evolved into the current Apple Silicon M1 processors we have in Macs.

Are there iPadOS apps that are harnessing the full computing power on Pro iPads? Definitely. Some.
Are there enough such apps to make it a viable choice of main platform for all but a tiny minority of users?

Doesn't seem so.
Why not? iPadOS "limitations" are most often cited.

 

[rui no onna]

What's baffling though is the amount of R&D and computing power they're putting they've spent to put laptop-/desktop-class processors into the Pro tablets. And the logistics to make that a separate (iPad Pro) product line - which I have little doubt that only a tiny minority is purchasing. And on top of that has a ridiculous amount of overlap in the 11" screen bracket (iPad Air and 11" Pro).
Are there iPadOS apps that are harnessing the full computing power on Pro iPads? Definitely. Some.
Are there enough such apps to make it a viable choice of main platform for all but a tiny minority of users?

You’re assuming all iPad Pro buyers want FCP, Logic, Xcode, etc. I expect the folks wanting those software on the iPad is a niche within a niche.

Chances are there are more customers buying the iPad Pro because they want a larger 12.9” display than due to any expectation of being able to run the aforementioned “pro” apps.

Mind considering the lack of improvement from Intel after Haswell (2013/2014?), I fully expect Apple was already targeting putting their own chips on at least the entry level Macs even back then. The good thing for Apple is they’re even making profit from their chipset experiments (iPad Pro).

 

[Zdigital2015]

Creative (re-) branding attempts aside, iOS and iPadOS are the (still!) very same thing. With only minuscule differences.

Imagine a world in which iPads and tablet computer hadn't been a thing for the last 12 years or so. And Apple was developing new, bigger handheld multitouch devices - AKA "tablets" - and a new OS that were something of a "middle ground" between iPhones and Macs. Well, the current iPadOS looks and feels as if someone at Apple said: "Let's take iOS, blow up the screen a bit, show two apps side-by-side and slide in things from left, right or a corner, to create an illusion of multitasking! That's all we need, innit? Piece of cake!"

That's of course what iPadOS evolved from and what it still feels today.
It doesn't feel like a "third" major operating syste,

No, there's only two major OS: macOS and iOS.
And iPadOS very much feels like a small remix (if not sorry afterthought and leftover) from the latter.

Now, I'm not saying it's necessarily bad thing to depart much from the iOS user interface and its paradigms. They've been well received and the iPad is a great "oversized companion" product to iPhones. But...

What's baffling though is the amount of R&D and computing power they're putting they've spent to put laptop-/desktop-class processors into the Pro tablets. And the logistics to make that a separate (iPad Pro) product line - which I have little doubt that only a tiny minority is purchasing. And on top of that has a ridiculous amount of overlap in the 11" screen bracket (iPad Air and 11" Pro).

It almost feels like a design study in CPU/GPU efficiency, performance and thermal management ("how far can we take this architecture to close the gap to desktop-class SoC?"). And a very successful one at that. Even more so in hindsight, where these SoC design actually evolved into the current Apple Silicon M1 processors we have in Macs.

Are there iPadOS apps that are harnessing the full computing power on Pro iPads? Definitely. Some.
Are there enough such apps to make it a viable choice of main platform for all but a tiny minority of users?

Doesn't seem so.
Why not? iPadOS "limitations" are most often cited.

Being tongue in cheek and very flippant in my reply, so please don’t think it’s directed at you personally - “It’s a pickle, I tell you!”

Apple has an I’d witty crisis with the iPad…too much like like iOS and it’s a toy consumption device with too many workarounds to be productive, given the high end hardware. Too far from iOS and it loses its appeal to iPhone users looking to expand into to Apple ecosystem and takes too much time to learn differentiated tasks versus just staying on Windows, which would be the target customer…so here we are, awesome hardware, lackluster OS with an identity crisis evolved over time.

 

[AppliedMicro]

You’re assuming all iPad Pro buyers want FCP, Logic, Xcode, etc.

No, there's no question that these are "niche" apps.

Chances are there are more customers buying the iPad Pro because they want a larger 12.9” display

Absolutely. That's why I said that the amount of computing power they're putting into these machines is baffling.

You don't need an M1, not even for casual image or video editing (or as a pen-enabled companion device to work on). You could cater to this clientele with less power and without Thunderbolt etc. - at more affordable prices. And sell more (bigger-screen) iPads doing so.

...which could work to popularise the platform.

They're currently building very powerful hardware. I can only imagine in the hope that it'll create demand for pro-level software. Has that worked well so far? Don't think so.

Maybe they should focus on increasing getting more bigger screen devices into customer's hands - which in turn could create demand for more "professional" software. And then refine the operating system along with that.

 

[petvas]

I don't believe that Apple will make any Pro apps for the iPad. There are just too many limitations built in the OS, that would have to get lifted first. Apps should be able to address all available memory for example. The biggest problem of iPadOS is that it's a mobile first OS, built for efficiency and battery life. Apps like Final Cut Pro would kill battery in minutes, so actually there is a device made for Pro scenarios..They call it the Mac!

 

[Carlanga]

If we don't get Final Cut for the M1 iPad Pro at WWDC, I am closing the book on this experiment. I do not need an M1 to read comic books and magazines or run lowend apps that are fine on the iPhone. The $300 iPad will suffice. The iPad "Pro" will have been a failed opportunity with no pro apps. I would never recommend an iPad Pro over the M1 Macbook Air. Apple has even lost Vitticci at this point, which is amazing.

I'm waiting to see if I can print two pages in one piece of paper and other basic functions

 

[Carlanga]

I don't believe that Apple will make any Pro apps for the iPad. There are just too many limitations built in the OS, that would have to get lifted first. Apps should be able to address all available memory for example. The biggest problem of iPadOS is that it's a mobile first OS, built for efficiency and battery life. Apps like Final Cut Pro would kill battery in minutes, so actually there is a device made for Pro scenarios..They call it the Mac!

so macbooks w m1?

 

[petvas]

I have stopped hoping that the iPad will become a serious computer many years ago. It will certainly get improved, but will never reach the functionality levels of a desktop OS and that isn't a bad thing. The iPad doesn't have to be a real computer. It can instead try to be the best the form factor can offer. Imagine using a Pro app on a 12,9" display. Imagine using a touch interface for that. Apps like Final Cut need precision. What is the advantage of having an iPad capable to run Final Cut Pro when compared to a MacBook Pro? There is none! Apple will never make the iPad as feature rich as a Mac. They are not crazy to destroy the Mac category. Microsoft has been trying for years to converge desktop and tablet devices, but has failed. Tomorrow we will see what Apple is thinking about the future of iPadOS. I wouldn't get my hopes up...

 

[petvas]

so macbooks w m1?

The CPU is not the limiting factor here but the OS limitations imposed for applications running on the system. The form factor also might be great for many different scenarios, but for classic desktop usage an iPad will always be inferior. Yes, theoretically you could connect an iPad to an external monitor, plug in a mouse and a keyboard and have a desktop kind of system, but that wouldn't solve the OS issues. The iPad has a long way to go and in the meantime people are buying more Macs again..

 

[rui no onna]

No, there's no question that these are "niche" apps.

Absolutely. That's why I said that the amount of computing power they're putting into these machines is baffling.

You don't need an M1, not even for casual image or video editing (or as a pen-enabled companion device to work on). You could cater to this clientele with less power and without Thunderbolt etc. - at more affordable prices. And sell more (bigger-screen) iPads doing so.

...which could work to popularise the platform.

They're currently building very powerful hardware. I can only imagine in the hope that it'll create demand for pro-level software. Has that worked well so far? Don't think so.

Maybe they should focus on increasing getting more bigger screen devices into customer's hands - which in turn could create demand for more "professional" software. And then refine the operating system along with that.

Sell more at lower prices, sure. The question is what will give them more profit? I don’t think the price/demand curve on these is particularly elastic.

I don’t think they save much money going with A14/15 versus M1. I expect the single biggest cost is the display. The high end chipsets are likely there partly to justify the higher prices.

Also, one problem with “professional” software is customers tend not to want to spend $$$ on iOS/iPadOS apps regardless of quality. Not to mention Apple gets a 30% cut from that.

As for computing power, Apple keeps making iPhones faster, too, but I don’t see anyone complaining about iPhones having too much computing power. Chances are within 1-2 generations, the iPhones will have M1-level performance with a smaller thermal and power envelope.

 

[Ludatyk]

I have stopped hoping that the iPad will become a serious computer many years ago. It will certainly get improved, but will never reach the functionality levels of a desktop OS and that isn't a bad thing. The iPad doesn't have to be a real computer. It can instead try to be the best the form factor can offer. Imagine using a Pro app on a 12,9" display. Imagine using a touch interface for that. Apps like Final Cut need precision.

Never? Such a absolute statement… not sure about that. And this idea of a ”real“ computer always confuses me.

What is the advantage of having an iPad capable to run Final Cut Pro when compared to a MacBook Pro? There is none! Apple will never make the iPad as feature rich as a Mac.

The advantage an iPad has over a MacBook is convenience… being able to pick it up and touch the screen. Federico brought up a good point… the iPad can transition to a laptop whereas a MacBook is stuck as a laptop. And having Final Cut Pro on an iPad gives a sense of freedom to get up and go while not being tied down to a certain spot.

They are not crazy to destroy the Mac category. Microsoft has been trying for years to converge desktop and tablet devices, but has failed. Tomorrow we will see what Apple is thinking about the future of iPadOS. I wouldn't get my hopes up...

Tbf, I thought the same. But I think @sracer brought up a good point… it’s not necessarily about destroying Mac category. It’s more so separating the two devices in effort to profit as long as possible, because Steve Jobs once mention if they don’t destroy their product line someone else will.

Therefore, at this point… it makes sense for Apple to keep the products separate in effort for profit. However, if they see an avenue where it makes sense to remove or converge devices… I don‘t see how they wouldn’t. Right now with features like Universal Control and SideCar… both macOS and iPadOS are doing well together.

 

[Dealmans]

A 1TB wifi M1 12.9" iPad Pro and MGK is $3248AUD here. I just bought a new 14" 16/1TB MacBook Pro for $2987.
No brainer.

 

[theotherphil]

The CPU is not the limiting factor here but the OS limitations imposed for applications running on the system. The form factor also might be great for many different scenarios, but for classic desktop usage an iPad will always be inferior. Yes, theoretically you could connect an iPad to an external monitor, plug in a mouse and a keyboard and have a desktop kind of system, but that wouldn't solve the OS issues. The iPad has a long way to go and in the meantime people are buying more Macs again..

Indeed, and anybody who has used sidecar or universal control can see exactly how poor an experience MacOS would be on the smaller screen of the iPad. The UI elements are far too small to allow a good touch experience so exactly how do we enable FCP (or more specifically Xcode) on an iPad and have it remain a "touch first" UI with KB/Mouse input as an option?

The screen real estate needed for this is much greater than that of even the 12.9" screen to have a great experience without imposing the need for an external monitor. A small amount of people buy the iPP, of that an even smaller amount want "pro" apps such as Xcode and then to impose a need for an external monitor reduces the potential customers even further. Swift Playgrounds allows some flexibility in coding location but for "real work", whatever that is, there is no way I'd be trying to code a large project on an iPP.

Case in point:

This is the MacOS version of Pixelmator Pro running in sidecar on the 12.9" iPP. There is limited space already for actual content you are working on when using desktop size UI elements. Compound that with the need to be able to touch those elements with your finger (unless you create a very specific use case of mandating accessories such as mouse, keyboard, stylus and external monitor), then it is not going to be a pleasant experience and you'd be in a much better position just buying a MBP (or indeed any laptop).


Second example for those people wanting multiple windows:

Again, it's not going to be a pleasant user experience...the UI elements are way too small and if their size is increased, there's little room for content.

So, where to go from here? We need to stop trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Just because something is technically possible, it doesn't mean it's a good idea.

I don't think we need to run MacOS on the iPP....it's going to be horrible, just like touch screen laptops. I think we need apps at a pro level aimed at iPadOS with feature parity with their desktop counterparts and specifically coded for a touch first interface. That right there though is going to take some serious thought and that's why we're where we are today.

 

[Flabasha]

The thing is, people are talking about the iPad as if it shouldnt exist. I find it mind blowing. I always here the same “niche” users talking about the iPad as failure because it doesnt run Final Cut pro or some other niche app. I’m thinking, do you actually know how many Final Cut Pro users are actually out there? Do you really think sales would go through the roof on IPads because Final Cut Pro would run on it?

Its a very small percentage of the population that run these apps. Microsoft Office was the most significant software release ever on the Ipad if we are talking about sales boosts. Other than that, the market has spoken. Apple releasing FCP on the iPad will not make a whole load of niche pro app developers immediately rush to port other pro apps. If they haven’t done it by now, they aren’t doing it.

And they aren’t doing it for various reasons. Most of all, the users they want to sell to who will spend hundreds of dollars on one app for work are primarily computer based and rely on computer based workflows. Any pro users uses multiple tools along with their main product. They all need to be there too. They may also rely on multiple drives, monitors etc.. So who will these pro app sellers sell their software to if they put in on the iPad pro?

And that brings us to the main reason. Kind of innovators dilemma. Ableton cant sell Live for 300 dollars+ on an iPad. No one would spend that amount. iOS prices are not Mac prices. So what would be the point? There are only so many users who would want that niche app. So they would be losing tons of money by making an iPad version. It’s the same for many pro apps.

If Apple makes FCP for iPad Pro it will be a marketing exercise rather than some true attempt to move everyone over to the iPad. And the reality is if you buy a MacBook Air instead of an iPad Pro then Apple is very happy to sell you that instead. The house still wins!

The IPad sells more units than the mac. I think they 17m ipads in q4 2021 vs 7m macs. We also know that some customers are never going to spend more than 400 dollars for a machine. So the Mac can never replace the units sold by the iPad. There are far more things that the iPad can be used for than the mac can in a real practical sense. So all this talk about the iPad Pro being useless and it being a failure I just dont get. I suppose people just resent their being a “pro” badged iPad because they don’t perceive value in it. But having high end in any product line is always a thing. Why should you be annoyed at that?

Why would you be annoyed at the great screen? The form factor? Etc.. I just find all this talk weird.

In an odd way, If the Mac didnt exist for some reason I could get by on a PC. But if my iPad with iOS disappeared, I dont think there is anything to really replace that.

Android has figured it out. My Galaxy Tab Ultra is a multi-tasking beast. Three apps can be onscreen, and you can save tons of open app combos, so I can instantly choose my Clip Studio/Chrome/Notes space, then flip over to my NomadSculpt/Clip Studio/File Explorer space, etc.

Switching to a “pro” Android tablet just brought into stark relief how much of a joke iPadOS is. It’ll be interesting to see how Apple does at rectifying some of that tomorrow. I’m set for the next few years with the Galaxy Tab, but I’ll always keep my eye on the iPad Pro to see if Apple ever decides to bring it back to relevance…

 

[orionquest]

FCPx on iPad is a very limited use case, unless you are just editing video, no titles, no FX, no managing your file. All of that needs other app supports and being able to do those things proficiantly, all of which would be a waste of time on an iPad fumbling around with the limited UI, and nevermind multitasking or preforming some activity in the background while you still work on something. So this is why there is iMovie for iPad which would be fine then.
But here we are 13 pages in....

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Three apps can be onscreen,

Three apps onscreen matches the iPad.

 

[Digitalguy]

Indeed, and anybody who has used sidecar or universal control can see exactly how poor an experience MacOS would be on the smaller screen of the iPad. The UI elements are far too small to allow a good touch experience so exactly how do we enable FCP (or more specifically Xcode) on an iPad and have it remain a "touch first" UI with KB/Mouse input as an option?

The screen real estate needed for this is much greater than that of even the 12.9" screen to have a great experience without imposing the need for an external monitor. A small amount of people buy the iPP, of that an even smaller amount want "pro" apps such as Xcode and then to impose a need for an external monitor reduces the potential customers even further. Swift Playgrounds allows some flexibility in coding location but for "real work", whatever that is, there is no way I'd be trying to code a large project on an iPP.

Case in point:

View attachment 2013899

This is the MacOS version of Pixelmator Pro running in sidecar on the 12.9" iPP. There is limited space already for actual content you are working on when using desktop size UI elements. Compound that with the need to be able to touch those elements with your finger (unless you create a very specific use case of mandating accessories such as mouse, keyboard, stylus and external monitor), then it is not going to be a pleasant experience and you'd be in a much better position just buying a MBP (or indeed any laptop).


Second example for those people wanting multiple windows:

View attachment 2013909

Again, it's not going to be a pleasant user experience...the UI elements are way too small and if their size is increased, there's little room for content.

So, where to go from here? We need to stop trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Just because something is technically possible, it doesn't mean it's a good idea.

I don't think we need to run MacOS on the iPP....it's going to be horrible, just like touch screen laptops. I think we need apps at a pro level aimed at iPadOS with feature parity with their desktop counterparts and specifically coded for a touch first interface. That right there though is going to take some serious thought and that's why we're where we are today.

What are you trying to show here? That MacOS does not work well with touch? I think everybody knows that. It works worse than Windows for that matter. Literally nobody is asking MacOS with touch on iPad. Even supporters of MacOS on iPad (something that will never happen, btw) would like MacOS as a non touch option in addition to iPadOS, and not as a replacement.
The 12.9in iPad is plenty large for MacOS to run with keyboard and trackpad. The 11in is a bit cramped but not impossible to use. Not worse that using MacOS on my 11.6 MacBook with a much worse screen resolution.