Just that Apple seems to be content with tackling the low-hanging fruit than addressing the thornier issues like lack of support for USB storage devices or running the same app side-by-side.
the only thing i miss is the ability of opening several instances of the same software.
I believe technically developers could create the ability to open two documents side by side within the same app right now if they want, like safari in iPad does (or more than two documents if using tabs). I wonder if that would be the most resource-efficient way to go, and maybe that’s why Apple is leaving that up to developers. But then if so, Apple should be implementing that functionality into their other first party productivity apps.
Why? Because there is more to various workflows than simply having access to one's files. Being able to use the same apps (not the desktop and mobile versions of the same app) anywhere and everywhere results in being equally productive in different scenarios.
Not trying to be obtuse, maybe I’m just not getting it, but wouldn’t one want a desktop version (designed for mouse input and bigger screen) and a mobile version (designed for touch) of each of their apps so that they are optimized for whichever form factor device they are using? And if so, how would the user experience be significantly better by having the same app switch modes when connecting the device to another device versus having files automatically sync (or Hand Off) between the two versions of the app on each dedicated device? Also docking is not a big hassle but automatic sync/hand off means you just walk up to the computer and start using it.
It would be terrific to be able to connect a smartphone/tablet to a physical keyboard, monitor, and mouse in various locations. Conference room, co-worker's office, coffee shop, library, lecture hall, classroom.
If it’s a place where it’s not feasible to have your own computer or user login on a shared computer, and if you’re not a laptop person, then I’d agree it would be convenient. But I don’t think these plug-in terminals are going to be everywhere any time soon. You could have them at home and at work, but that’s usually where people can have their own computer or user login. So while I’m sure the use case exists, I’m just not sure the demand is strong enough in the mainstream to convince Apple to build that type of functionality into their iPads or iPhones. Especially considering the technical hurdle of getting iOS app developers to make additional desktop optimized versions of their apps, or running x86 alongside ARM.
I don't want to debate yet again, the merits of having a mouse with mobile/touch devices, but only point this out because software does NOT have to be specifically designed for the mouse.
If you’re talking about just running iOS, as is, on the bigger monitor with a mouse and keyboard, then there wouldn’t be so much a technical hurdle, and it wouldn’t detract from the mobile experience, but it still wouldn’t be the optimal desktop experience, which may be the lone reason Apple doesn’t provide mouse support in iOS.
But I agree with you that a mouse on iPad would work and is sometimes needed. Using a physical keyboard without a mouse is non-optimal unless you’re working only in Terminal or something. I think Apple backed themselves into a corner with this one, but that’s another topic.
In short, I’m not against mouse support, nor monitor support really. My point was more that if there’s already a monitor (and keyboard and mouse) just sitting there, from a pure functionality standpoint, if able, it seems more beneficial to have a cheap Mac mini connected to it all the time rather than docking an iOS device. The Mac mini can do more than an iOS device can in that environment because it was designed for it from the ground up, and a dedicated computer has other benefits.
