All iPads iPads shouldn't run macOS - Stage Manager shows it clearly

[JamesTheMac]

Regarding the disappointment of the latest iPadOS, for me, I think it's a combination of the fact I can be more productive on a lower cost and lesser processing power tablet that costs less than a $2k Apple tablet, and also knowing that Apple have done such a great job with the iPadOS over the years and making many things so seamless and elegant, it's frustrating to be hamstrung by what seem like quirky ideas that try to offer what most people want, but miss the mark.

Back to the original question/point though. One quirky UI implementation is not enough to say that macOS should never appear on an iPad. - It won't in any event. What we can hope for is something less quirky to evolve from this over time, and for app developers to get better at using the new Desktop Class APIs. Then it will increase the $2k+ iPad Pro's productive value to better compete with the Surface, which at the moment has the edge if I want something powerful to get work done efficiently with a semi-touch UI format.

BTW - Who is Frank? and why do so many people want to be him/her/they?

 

[Rafterman]

Nope, it wouldn't. You have zero idea what you're talking about.

OK, I don't know what I think about the product I own. Got it, Glad you are here to tell us our proper opnions.

 

[Rafterman]

One quirky UI implementation is not enough to say that macOS should never appear on an iPad. - It won't in any event.

I wish I could get a dollar for every person who said Apple will never do something. I would be Tim Cook rich.

 

[cupcakes2000]

I think we just have different definitions of desktop-grade apps. I can agree there have been great i(Pad)OS apps, especially those which uniquely benefit from the iPad-specific features, like the touch-based interface. Some of those apps have been used in professional environments. But in the grand scale of things, iPad apps were always pared-down to compensate for the platform's inherent Apple-imposed restrictions.

There are probably people out there who only use an iPad to take notes in Notepad or Pages, but that doesn't make iPad Pages a pro-grade app. Windows or even MacOS Word will p*ss all over it.

Using the Microsoft office example that was originally spoke of. You’re suggesting that it’s entirely apples fault that it’s terrible in comparison with the desktop suite, and due to apples restrictions it’s impossible for the devs to make it on par? I think we both know that’s not the case.

I’m not saying apple has done it right, or iPadOS is perfect, obviously. But I am saying that the apps that are **** are **** when they don’t have to be. And that’s on the devs.

 

[Tagbert]

And the touch screen would be disabled. As it should be. There is even a reliable leak that says this is exactly what is coming.

Why would you disable the touchscreen? Touchscreens are useful even on OSs that are not optimized for touch. No, you are not using touch for everything but there are many cases where touch is the best interaction. This allows a multi-model interaction model where users switch between touch, keyboard, and mouse/trackpad depending on the specific action.

We don’t need to keep our food from touching on the plate. A little mixture is fine.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

There is even a reliable leak that says this is exactly what is coming.

first of all, that is not a reliable leak.
Random leakers almost never get anything right about software, because Apple does all of its software testing in house.
Hardware leaks are one thing, but there are way more examples of people getting software leaks wrong, then getting them right.
But also, straight from that article you linked:
“Testing is being done with a 25% larger macOS UI so it is suitable for touch. However, apps run on the product would still be iPad-optimized versions, not macOS ones.”
So, it’s a version of macOS… that cannot run macOS applications.
So… a touch friendly OS designed by Apple that doesn’t run the same applications as it’s desktop counterpart… Oh, wait, that’s just iPadOS.
Now could Apple be working on a mode that expands the iPads capabilities? Basically a wider scale version of stage manager that does more than just windows?
Absolutely they could, and I bet they are, but that’s not a different operating system.
That’s just a beefier iPadOS.

 

[AlexESP]

Stage Manager is nowhere near the multitasking and windowing capabilities of MacOS. Just because Stage Manager isn't great has zero to do with iPads and their ability to run MacOS.

I''m not sure why people are so quick to cheer getting less. As if Apple is telling us what's good for us amd you'll like it. With a few tweaks to the user interface, MacOS would work fine on iPads.

If Apple sold a Surface Pro like device running MacOS, people would lose their bleep over it. Just like they pizzzzed on large screen phones. "Oh, large screen phones are laughable, no one wnats that." Now, the iPhone Pro Max is their best seller.

I'd say the problem is thinking that "With a few tweaks to the user interface, MacOS would work fine on iPads". Microsoft did A LOT of tweaks with Windows 8. But it was a disaster, because the OS wasn't thought from the ground up for touch control. They had to undo all of that, and end up building classic laptops with touch screen. I think Apple has shown the iPad concept is way more successful than those alternatives.

 

[AlexESP]

Hate to admit it, but for me, if I want to get the most productive work done on the road I have to resort to a Surface Pro, (or even the Surface Go 3 works better for me if I want to travel light). It provides me with a quick and efficient way of having multiple windows open, and that I can switch between, without the faff of snapping views and piles.

This trying to keep the touch interface on an iPad to one screen doesn't work efficiently for me. I wish it did, as I don't really like Windows. But when time is money, I have to go with the most efficient route,

Having a full floating windowed version of iPadOS, even if it was only active when the keyboard was attached would bring the best of both worlds for me, and allow me to completely switch from Windows.

So basically, you're describing a Mac right? Because the Surface doesn't magically switch to touch interface when undocked. And between a Surface and a Mac (or a traditional PC laptop, MacVsPC is not the main point here), the later wins, because it doesn't have the compromises of the former.

 

[AlexESP]

iPads shouldn't run MacOS, indeed... as their main OS, but as a secondary OS (dual boot or virtualized), with no full touch support, just like Sidecar (although that's not in Apple's interest, so unlikely)
Stage Manager is bad because it's an half way that is not good with touch or with keyboard and mouse, mainly because of apps resizing limitations. It should have been left for the external monitor at best.
Instead Apple should have improved iPadOS multitasking on the tablet screen, and as much as fanboys will hate this, they should have done something like Samsung OneUI (not Dex) which is much more powerful than the current multitasking, but still touch friendly.

Shipping one device with two OS at the same time, where you have to reboot, with partitions, restricted APIs... doesn't seem like the best idea. Also, I completely disagree with OneUI being touch-friendly. It's a clunky way to manage windows, it just doesn't feel natural in touch-based interfaces.

 

[AlexESP]

It's bad simply because Apple decided to do something stupid and not making the windows management exactly like macOS, just because they don't want iPad to look like a far superior macOS. Instead they took the idea that works for decades and turned it into an unintuitive, hard to use restricted mess.

So they simply like to be roasted in reviews and get less sales because they don't want it to look superior to macOS? Classic window management has worked for decades on traditional computers, based on mouse and keyboard, it's NOT proven for decades on tablets. There's a reason why traditional OS-based tablets have failed for a decade.

 

[AlexESP]

Judging the suitability of a desktop-like UI on an iPad by Stage Manager is pretty myopic, IMO. Stage Manager is typical of how Apple responds to users' requests for things that Apple is fundamentally against. A half-hearted, half-baked implementation designed to cause champions of the feature to complain... leading to the impression that those people are never satisfied.

Users: We want "x".
Apple: (half-baked implementation of "x")
Users. Not like that!

Where x = external keyboard support, mouse support, USB-C support, split window support, and now multi-window support.

Does Apple eventually refine the implementation to a point that is generally acceptable? Mostly, but not always.

Take a look at Samsung's DeX as an example of a better (but not perfect) implementation of what Stage Manager is attempting to do.

I don't think Stage Manager is half-baked. In fact, I think it's optimized as much as possible for touch screens, but even then, that concept just doesn't work. I'd say DeX is way worse than Stage Manager. I know it gets a lot of praise online, but does anyone really use it? That gives us a hint. Unfortunately we don't have statistics, but let me doubt that. We're used to fluid interfaces in touch-based devices, with objects that move automatically, swipes instead of taps, etc. Classic window interfaces are nothing like that.

 

[MajorFubar]

Using the Microsoft office example that was originally spoke of. You’re suggesting that it’s entirely apples fault that it’s terrible in comparison with the desktop suite, and due to apples restrictions it’s impossible for the devs to make it on par? I think we both know that’s not the case.

I’m not saying apple has done it right, or iPadOS is perfect, obviously. But I am saying that the apps that are **** are **** when they don’t have to be. And that’s on the devs.

It's a combination of things. The apple-imposed restrictions created an environment where it was very difficult to port-across desktop-class apps without a serious compromise. On top of that, the devs had to consider whether trying to circumvent compromises imposed by the OS (and at one point, also the hardware, but less-so now) was worth it for the tiny demographic of users who would have actually been willing to pay desktop prices for iPad apps of equivalent functionality (or, as near to equivalent functionality as the hardware and OS would allow). That latter consideration was a result of the 'image problem' the iPad always had (some may argue it still has) that it's 'just a big iPhone' mainly aimed at content consumption.

All of this is entirely Apple's fault. And by 'fault', I mean it is entirely how Apple chose to build and market iPads. It was all a conscious choice.

By your argument, devs were purposefully giving us under-performing apps of inferior quality when there was a clear option, and a clear market, to give us desktop-class apps and sell them at PC/Mac app prices. That point of view does not make any commercial sense.

 

[cupcakes2000]

By your argument, devs were purposefully giving us under-performing apps of inferior quality when there was a clear option, and a clear market, to give us desktop-class apps and sell them at PC/Mac app prices. That point of view does not make any commercial sense.

That’s why we have affinity photo verses Photoshop on the iPad, to use one example. One is a s/w house that saw the big players ‘not seeing the bigger picture’ and as a result we have the big king Photoshop relegated to playing distant catch-up on arguably what should be it’s most useable platform.

Devs not seeing the potential has nothing to do with supposed ‘Apple imposed limitations’.

 

[PauloSera]

Why would you disable the touchscreen? Touchscreens are useful even on OSs that are not optimized for touch. No, you are not using touch for everything but there are many cases where touch is the best interaction. This allows a multi-model interaction model where users switch between touch, keyboard, and mouse/trackpad depending on the specific action.

We don’t need to keep our food from touching on the plate. A little mixture is fine.

If you don't already understand it then no one can explain it to you.

 

[theotherphil]

Stage Manager is nowhere near the multitasking and windowing capabilities of MacOS. Just because Stage Manager isn't great has zero to do with iPads and their ability to run MacOS.

I''m not sure why people are so quick to cheer getting less. As if Apple is telling us what's good for us amd you'll like it. With a few tweaks to the user interface, MacOS would work fine on iPads.

If Apple sold a Surface Pro like device running MacOS, people would lose their bleep over it. Just like they pizzzzed on large screen phones. "Oh, large screen phones are laughable, no one wnats that." Now, the iPhone Pro Max is their best seller.

Only we've got direct comparisons with other devices such as touch screen laptops and 2-in-1's. The data is quite interesting as hardly anybody uses the touch screen with a desktop OS, despite having the option to. This means everybody has to pay the price - in cost, weight, battery life that could be used in other areas.

The only tablet that has been truly successful is the iPad....maybe Apple know more than the average user who has no idea what they want - other than "I want everything and want to pay nothing".

 

[Feyl]

So they simply like to be roasted in reviews and get less sales because they don't want it to look superior to macOS? Classic window management has worked for decades on traditional computers, based on mouse and keyboard, it's NOT proven for decades on tablets. There's a reason why traditional OS-based tablets have failed for a decade.

Hm, ok.. and why the avalanche of complaints on Stage Manager?

 

[MajorFubar]

That’s why we have affinity photo verses Photoshop on the iPad, to use one example. One is a s/w house that saw the big players ‘not seeing the bigger picture’ and as a result we have the big king Photoshop relegated to playing distant catch-up on arguably what should be it’s most useable platform.

Devs not seeing the potential has nothing to do with supposed ‘Apple imposed limitations’.

There are a few well-known apps which iPad users constantly tout as proof that iPad apps can compete with the best desktop-class apps, one of which is iPad Affinity Photo. And the problem with that argument, which few of us like to mention for fear of causing offence, is that ultimately Affinity Photo is thoroughly trashed by Photoshop when you start delving really deeply into what both can do, beyond basic and intermediate image editing.

Another app constantly wheeled-out to show just what iPad apps can do is Luma Fusion: the iPad video editor which iPad movie makers ubiquitously migrate to when they're done with iMovie. And 'for an iPad app' it's truly fantastic, but it's still absolutely buried in the ground by the best movie-editing applications you can buy for Mac/PC, such as Premiere, Final Cut and Media Composer.

Your whole argument revolves around this fallacy that the high-profile developers are selling deliberately-subpar iPad apps when they could instead offer desktop-class apps that rival what they offer for Windows and MacOS. And I say again (and I accept it's unlikely we will ever agree), such a theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny because it's entirely without motive. The reason they only sell subpar half-baked equivalents is mostly a combination of iPad's OS and (legacy) hardware restrictions limiting what such products can do, along with a perception that the market isn't big enough to try to circumvent the limitations.

 

[cupcakes2000]

There are a few well-known apps which iPad users constantly tout as proof that iPad apps can compete with the best desktop-class apps, one of which is iPad Affinity Photo. And the problem with that argument, which few of us like to mention for fear of causing offence, is that ultimately Affinity Photo is thoroughly trashed by Photoshop when you start delving really deeply into what both can do, beyond basic and intermediate image editing.

Another app constantly wheeled-out to show just what iPad apps can do is Luma Fusion: the iPad video editor which iPad movie makers ubiquitously migrate to when they're done with iMovie. And 'for an iPad app' it's truly fantastic, but it's still absolutely buried in the ground by the best movie-editing applications you can buy for Mac/PC, such as Premiere, Final Cut and Media Composer.

Your whole argument revolves around this fallacy that the high-profile developers are selling deliberately-subpar iPad apps when they could instead offer desktop-class apps that rival what they offer for Windows and MacOS. And I say again (and I accept it's unlikely we will ever agree), such a theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny because it's entirely without motive. The reason they only sell subpar half-baked equivalents is mostly a combination of iPad's OS and (legacy) hardware restrictions limiting what such products can do, along with a perception that the market isn't big enough to try to circumvent the limitations.

It is proof. It’s proof that good devs can work within these so called limitations I hear no end about on sites like this - whilst I’m working on my iPad.

I didn’t say they were deliberately doing anything, putting words in to peoples mouths to prove your point. Nice, if that’s the only way you can do it go for it.

I said that developers and software houses have failed to see the potential in the platform. And those that have seen the potential have over taken those who haven’t, on the iPad.

I also didn’t proclaim that AF is better than Photoshop - on the mac. It’s not. But it pisses all over Photoshop on the iPad. Why is that?

All you’re really doing is proving my point that the big developers on the main platforms don’t want to develop for the iPad because they don’t see the potential or don’t think it’s worth it. That’s all that’s stopping them. Seeing the potential is why small players have over taken the big guys on the platform.

 

[AlexESP]

Hm, ok.. and why the avalanche of complaints on Stage Manager?

Because it’s bad! Free windowing on tablets seems not to work. Your main point was that a classic window system would be fine, but EVEN a system adapted to touch controls has failed. One which is not would be even worse.

 

[sparksd]

There are a few well-known apps which iPad users constantly tout as proof that iPad apps can compete with the best desktop-class apps, one of which is iPad Affinity Photo. And the problem with that argument, which few of us like to mention for fear of causing offence, is that ultimately Affinity Photo is thoroughly trashed by Photoshop when you start delving really deeply into what both can do, beyond basic and intermediate image editing.

Another app constantly wheeled-out to show just what iPad apps can do is Luma Fusion: the iPad video editor which iPad movie makers ubiquitously migrate to when they're done with iMovie. And 'for an iPad app' it's truly fantastic, but it's still absolutely buried in the ground by the best movie-editing applications you can buy for Mac/PC, such as Premiere, Final Cut and Media Composer.

Your whole argument revolves around this fallacy that the high-profile developers are selling deliberately-subpar iPad apps when they could instead offer desktop-class apps that rival what they offer for Windows and MacOS. And I say again (and I accept it's unlikely we will ever agree), such a theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny because it's entirely without motive. The reason they only sell subpar half-baked equivalents is mostly a combination of iPad's OS and (legacy) hardware restrictions limiting what such products can do, along with a perception that the market isn't big enough to try to circumvent the limitations.

Compare the price for LumaFusion against those PC/Mac offerings. Same for Affinity vs Photoshop. How many people are going to pay similar prices for iPad apps?

 

[Shirasaki]

Ca'mon... seriously? Just because it has M1 doesn't mean it should act like a Mac. What I believe the M1 on the iPad does is help facilitate in bringing desktop class apps to the platform... not pushing it to be a Mac.


Well, it hasn't failed in my case... I consider myself a power user, not sure what user base you are referring to. But the reason why Stage Manager isn't a big deal on the Mac is due to the fact multiple windows active on the screen already exist. Whereas it's a whole new experience on the iPad hence why the polarizing opinions of users.

Yeah, except lots of people in the tech community believes ipad can be Mac now because they use the same SoC. iPad as a product line never has clear boundaries on what it can do and what it can’t do, tipping toe on both iPhone and Mac (more on Mac nowadays but still). And that’s after 12 years since introduction. Some want to use it as a laptop and find those critical pissing moments where that ONE step can’t be done the way desktop OS can, or can’t be done at all, failing the task. Despite having cellular option, it can’t make phone calls or send sms, so using it as a phone is fundamentally impossible, despite running about 100% of iPhone apps even today.

If it shouldn’t act like a mac, and it shouldn't act like a phone, what should it act like? Tablet? iPad sale never eclipse iPhone sale despite cheap iPad being popular, alongside a slew of (confusing and unnecessary) options. Pricing also pushes people to either go with MBA or iPhone, rather than getting an iPad. Stage manager is just one more example apple trying to appeal people with multitasking demand but never fully commit to it and the result is as half-baked and half-polished they can possibly be.

 

[GuruZac]

When it was introduced, I was skeptical about Stage Manager. I always thought that a classical window management system wouldn't work on a touch-based device, but I have confidence in Apple when it comes to this sort of stuff. In the end, it's been a failure.

Some people argued that this shows Apple should implement a macOS-like interface, or even macOS directly. This doesn't make any sense. Apple has adapted windows in SM so that controls (resize handle, top bar...) have the precision of a fingertip, and that they replicate the metaphors we're used to in touch-first devices (for example, dragging instead of tapping). Even then, the experience sucks.

So imagine how bad a macOS-like interface, with traffic light buttons, infinite resize and positions, etc. would be. Well, we don't even have to imagine: we have dozens of Windows 10/11 so-called tablets out there, and no one* use them as tablets.

In the end, I think the professional potential of the iPad goes in line with maximizing the iPad-like, single-window interface. There are tons of AR, illustration, video editing, etc. apps. Customers use them professionally. Some people think making the iPad a professional device means making it a subpar PC. No professional user would buy that.

What Stage Manager on macOS has done is show how much more useful and functional Stage Manager on iPadOS could be if Apple would have allowed full control over window size and placement. The preselected locations and sizes on iPadOS make Stage Manager all but useless for me on my iPad. But I use Stage Manager all the time on my Mac.

 

[darngooddesign]

...BTW - Who is Frank? and why do so many people want to be him/her/they?

To be frank, Frank is a guy who is frank, and people want to be Frank so they can be frank like Frank is frank.

 

[Isengardtom]

iPads shouldn't run MacOS, indeed... as their main OS, but as a secondary OS (dual boot or virtualized), with no full touch support, just like Sidecar (although that's not in Apple's interest, so unlikely)

As a principle I agree, only thing I would worry about is the amount of storage space that would take up. But as you say, it’s nothing Apple interests, because of the App Store

 

[iPadified]

An iPad running MacOS=a modular MBA. Perhaps a good idea.

Many of you seem to miss the possibility that people choose iPadOS to avoid MacOS (and windows). Similarly, many of us uses MacOS instead of Windows despite the much poorer software (and hardware) options.