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

[bronksy]

When they launched the M1 iPads I was sure this was a way to bring pro apps to the iPad. Clearly it's not going to happen.
The fact that Apple tout Lumafusion in their marketing is also a pretty big indicator.
Luma is amazing, I know a tonne of Mobile Journalists use this as their only edit tool then upload for broadcast / distribution. However, FCP is really often neglected by apple and a recent letter from the post production industry to apple is begging them to push more on the dev of FCP.

I bought an IPP when they changed the shape to the more square one. Bought the keyboard, all sorts. Now it's used as a monitor to watch online content whilst I work. I vowed never to buy and iPad again because it seemed pointless.

Then the iPad mini was revamped and I use this about 200% more than any other iPad I've ever owned because I can take it with me. I dont expect it to perform like my M1 MacBook Air, but ironically it's a perfect size for content creation on the go. With the pencil it's a very very good device but with the caveats that come with iPads. USB-C helps massively with this too, so adding images, video files, hard drives etc is much easier now but yes.. there's still something missing.

The M1 Air is very good, and about the same weight (and cheaper) than a fully loaded up iPad Pro. keyboard case etc. I dont see a reason to buy a large iPad anymore for more than the cost of a fully-blown laptop.

 

[MajorFubar]

There are lots of pro apps for the iPad, just none that apple make..

The Amiga was not by any means a pro computer, it was a low end (albeit amazing) home geared all in one, aimed at competing with the ST. True the ‘pro computer’ concept didn’t really exist back then, but the st and the amiga were home computers. IBM compats were the business computers and Apple Macs were the DTP and design computers.

Amigas could however run rings round Macs which at the time had crap B&W screens, while PCs went beep and displayed four colour graphics unless you added third party hardware. The only thing holding back the Amiga is it was marketed by Commodore, who would have marketed a KFC as a warm battered dead bird.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Amigas could however run rings round Macs which at the time had crap B&W screens, while PCs went beep and displayed four colour graphics unless you added third party hardware. The only thing holding back the Amiga is it was marketed by Commodore, who would have marketed a KFC as a warm battered dead bird.

They didn’t have the required software to run rings around the mac, for what people purchased a Mac for. Amigas were home computers, excellent ones, but made for games and home business stuff.

 

[MajorFubar]

They didn’t have the required software to run rings around the mac, for what people purchased a Mac for. Amigas were home computers, excellent ones, but made for games and home business stuff.

That's because Apple knew how to market the Mac and Commodore hadn't got a single clue what to do with the Amiga other than market it as a games machine, not least because they already had a toe in the water marketing PC compatibles, so would be competing with themselves. Remember Commodore didn't develop the Amiga, they bought it in. Its off-the-shelf capabilities ran rings round the Mac, including a WIMP-based OS which from day 1 supported preemptive multitasking. It eventually found its own niche in studios doing raytracing for TV programmes like Babylon 5. Also hundreds if not thousands of 'in the box' bedroom producers (me included) cut their teeth using an Amiga because it included a built-in 4-channel sampler.

 

[yabeweb]

To me, labeling something pro (in this case app) is silly

In case of a software it can be anything you can make money out of it

In the case of hardware, pro is considered High Performance.

After all, even Facebook is a pro app for people that makes money on social medias, who can say this is pro and this is not?

 

[MajorFubar]

To me, labeling something pro (in this case app) is silly

In case of a software it can be anything you can make money out of it

In the case of hardware, pro is considered High Performance.

After all, even Facebook is a pro app for people that makes money on social medias, who can say this is pro and this is not?

This is very true and is why I tend to call such apps "desktop class", which even itself is a vagary but I think most people know that I mean the difference between high-performing Mac/PC apps like Photoshop and the low-aspirational version of Photoshop on the iPad, to give one example. Or Cubase vs Cubasis, to give another. Technically there are no pro apps. If you can make money drawing pictures on your YouTube channel using Microsoft Paint, who's to argue it's not a pro app.

 

[AF_APPLETALK]

That’s a weird way of failing… selling twice as many units than the Mac for the last 2-3 years.

You're trying to discuss market/sales failure, I'm discussing failure of being able to supplant the Mac. They objectively failed at this, but nice distraction.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Being able to make iOS apps.

Using Swift Playgrounds, one can write apps for iOS AND upload them to the App Store.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Correct. I was more pointing out that the iPad is using an antiquated system of resource management, rather than knocking the C64. The C64 was of course a great machine. Except unless if you were a BASIC programmer. In which case it was sh-t and incapable of even nearly making use of the advanced graphics and sound hardware they fitted under the lid. That's why I personally never bought one [/OT]

To be fair, though, “pushing the limits” of a C64 wasn’t REALLY that hard

 

[MajorFubar]

To be fair, though, “pushing the limits” of a C64 wasn’t REALLY that hard

It is if you are a Jedi Master level programmer . The best of the modern C64 demo-scene shows what the hardware can be forced to do. If they'd had the programming skills in 1982 to show it running these modern demos it would have looked like some kind of supercomputer from the future.

 

[4743913]

The Amiga was not by any means a pro computer, it was a low end (albeit amazing) home geared all in one, aimed at competing with the ST. True the ‘pro computer’ concept didn’t really exist back then, but the st and the amiga were home computers. IBM compats were the business computers and Apple Macs were the DTP and design computers.

not as amazing as your revisionist history Amiga existed before the ST and Tramiel wanted it for Atari when he bought Atari in 1984. Long story short, Commodore got it but was sued by Atari and it delayed Amigas release. The ST was an inferior machine and Atari knew it. So no, Amiga was not made to compete with the ST. Since you brought up IBM compatibility as the mark of a "pro" machine, my Amiga 2k was ibm compatible thanks to its bridgeboard. and dont get me started on the Toaster. While macs were cutting pasting magazine articles, Amigas were crafting shows like Babylon5 or Sega Genesis games.

/history

 

[ericwn]

You're trying to discuss market/sales failure, I'm discussing failure of being able to supplant the Mac. They objectively failed at this, but nice distraction.

Nice to mention distractions when you folks are obviously not speaking on topic at all anymore - which was the expectations of FCP on iPadOS for wwdc.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You're trying to discuss market/sales failure, I'm discussing failure of being able to supplant the Mac. They objectively failed at this, but nice distraction.

You do realize that what MOST folks need a computer for, email, web browsing, editing photos… those tasks can be done on an iPad. That there’s a few thousand folks that specifically want FCP doesn’t matter in the big picture, there are folks buying iPads everyday that are now out of the Mac market.

Sure, there are folks that will never “get” touch interfaces and will always buy systems that match the computer experience they’re most accustomed to. But, for those that have never used a Mac (most of the world) an iPad does what they need a computer to do.

 

[cupcakes2000]

not as amazing as your revisionist history Amiga existed before the ST and Tramiel wanted it for Atari when he bought Atari in 1984. Long story short, Commodore got it but was sued by Atari and it delayed
Amigas release. The ST was an inferior machine and Atari knew it. So no, Amiga was not made to compete with the ST. Since you brought up IBM compatibility as the mark of a "pro" machine, my Amiga 2k was ibm compatible thanks to its bridgeboard. and dont get me started on the Toaster. While macs were cutting pasting magazine articles, Amigas were crafting shows like Babylon5 or Sega Genesis games. /history

I was merely stating that they were competing in the home market, not the pro market. The pro concept didn’t exist until these machines were already released.

Here is the real version of what you’re wittering about

The Amiga Story: Conceived at Atari, Born at Commodore | Low End Mac

lowendmac.com

 

[Apple$]

I'd just pick up a base iPad or iPad Air M1 over the iPad Pro M1 ANYDAY!

 

[Ghost31]

I’ve used final cut and complained about it not being on the iPad. Then I downloaded Luma fusion and stopped caring

 

[GuruZac]

The fact that the iPad Pro line is around for about 7 years by now indicates it’s likely going to stick around though.

I hope it does. As I said, I‘m a long time user and fan of the product. I just wish Apple would make a few changes to the software that could really open up the hardware potential.

 

[macfacts]

There is a big difference. M1 Pro has 8 P cores and 2 E cores and up to 16 GPU cores. It also includes a Media Engine and support for more monitors and also RAM can be upgraded to 32GB.

Yeah M1 is a worthy chip no doubt.

You can't upgrade the ram on iPads.

 

[ian87w]

I wouldn't hold my breath. Apple cannot even make the iPad to be completely independent from a PC/Mac with its own recovery mode. DFU mode still requires an actual PC/Mac. So much for the post-PC era.

 

[yabeweb]

This is very true and is why I tend to call such apps "desktop class", which even itself is a vagary but I think most people know that I mean the difference between high-performing Mac/PC apps like Photoshop and the low-aspirational version of Photoshop on the iPad, to give one example. Or Cubase vs Cubasis, to give another. Technically there are no pro apps. If you can make money drawing pictures on your YouTube channel using Microsoft Paint, who's to argue it's not a pro app.

Try Affinity Photo on the iPad, much better than Photoshop.

I agree with you 100% on the desktop class app, and Affinity is very close to be one.

 

[GMShadow]

Let’s get real - an iPad running iPad OS 15 is just a big iPhone, offering better multitasking due to its screen size. Then there is a portability bonus, which, ironically, is being lost the moment we combine a 12.9” iPad Pro with its Magic Keyboard.

I disagree - while I wouldn't say the 12.9 + MKB combo is light, I often find it more portable than hauling around the 16" MBP, and felt it was more flexible/practical than keeping my old MBA around.

 

[ian87w]

I stand corrected, I was not aware they were that expensive.

That might reflect the truer cost of PCs. OEMs generally don't get any subsidies on Chromebooks, thus the price usually correlates more accurately to the cost. When OEMs use Windows, they tend to get subsidies from either Microsoft or the various bloatware (eg. McAffee), lowering the sale price. Thus I often see Windows laptops being cheaper than Chromebooks (which logically doesn't make sense).

 

[one more]

I disagree - while I wouldn't say the 12.9 + MKB combo is light, I often find it more portable than hauling around the 16" MBP, and felt it was more flexible/practical than keeping my old MBA around.

Sure, a 16” MBP will weigh more. Yet if you compare similar screen sizes (13”), you get these:

iPad Pro 12” = 1.5 pounds (682 grams)

Magic Keyboard = 1.56 pounds (710 grams)

MacBook Air = 2.8 pounds (1.29 kg or 1290 grams)

 

[4743913]

I was merely stating that they were competing in the home market, not the pro market. The pro concept didn’t exist until these machines were already released.

Here is the real version of what you’re wittering about

The Amiga Story: Conceived at Atari, Born at Commodore | Low End Mac

lowendmac.com

your first machine ran a Windows OS didn't it? Yes I have seen that article, and its not a bad summary. Its not accurate in some areas according to more respected sources.

the amiga was a pro machine that was also affordable for home users. not many home users were rocking a genlock or video toaster back then. and yes you are incorrect when you say there was not a pro concept prior to these machines. maybe your concept of pro didn't exist then.

and and your word "wittering".. are we a scot or just lifting their vernacular.

 

[cupcakes2000]

your first machine ran a Windows OS didn't it? Yes I have seen that article, and its not a bad summary. Its not accurate in some areas according to more respected sources.

the amiga was a pro machine that was also affordable for home users. not many home users were rocking a genlock or video toaster back then. and yes you are incorrect when you say there was not a pro concept prior to these machines. maybe your concept of pro didn't exist then.

My first machine was a home built ZX81