All iPads No evolution or revolution for iPadOS 18

[Rafterman]

It’s not just the bigger screen. I cannot plug my iPhone into an external desktop monitor and use it like a desktop. I can do that with iPadOS. I can’t use several of the apps I regularly use on my iPad on my iPhone because they don’t exist on iOS, but do on iPadOS. It doesn’t magnetize to a keyboard and trackpad. I cannot use an Apple Pencil on my iPhone. So no, the iPad is not just a big iPhone.

Lot of apps don't exist on iPadOS, but do do MacOS. You are talking about accessories, not core functionality.

MacOS can run iPad apps, and that opens it up to apps that normally aren't made for Macs. I enjoy Word Master Pro, a scrabble-like game, that isn't available for Mac, but is on iPad. Imagine doing that for iPad. Imagine being able to run Parallels on iPad and running ARM Windows. Or full blown Mac Office apps or Adobe apps, not dumbed down versions. It would open up iPad to so many possibilities.

Don't think so small. Apple has perfected the hardware. Now it's time to work on the software. Put a 8 cylinder muscle engine in that Ferrari hardware, not the 4 cylinder Yugo engine that it has now.

 

[Kal Madda]

Lot of apps don't exist on iPadOS, but do do MacOS. You are talking about accessories, not core functionality.

MacOS can run iPad apps, and that opens it up to apps that normally aren't made for Macs. I enjoy Word Master Pro, a scrabble-like game, that isn't available for Mac, but is on iPad. Imagine doing that for iPad. Imagine being able to run Parallels on iPad and running ARM Windows. Or full blown Mac Office apps or Adobe apps, not dumbed down versions. It would open up iPad to so many possibilities.

Don't think so small. Apple has perfected the hardware. Now it's time to work on the software. Put a 8 cylinder muscle engine in that Ferrari hardware, not the 4 cylinder Yugo engine that it has now.

A. Those kinds of accessories are supported by iPadOS and aren’t supported by iOS on my iPhone.

B. I’ve never argued against Mac apps being ported over to iPadOS. I’ve said before that I think it could be useful to do so. But it’s a complicated matter, because macOS supports legacy code standards that iPadOS doesn’t. And many Mac apps still use those code standards. So Apple would either have to weigh down iPadOS with legacy code, or create a toolkit similar to Catalyst that could swap legacy code for modern code that can run on iPadOS. I think the latter is far more likely, and watching Swift code, I believe that’s the direction we’re headed with Swift. One code base for your app, and support on every Apple platform. I don’t know why people assume I’m against Mac apps on iPadOS just because I don’t want to replace iPadOS with macOS.

 

[Rafterman]

A. Those kinds of accessories are supported by iPadOS and aren’t supported by iOS on my iPhone.

B. I’ve never argued against Mac apps being ported over to iPadOS. I’ve said before that I think it could be useful to do so. But it’s a complicated matter, because macOS supports legacy code standards that iPadOS doesn’t. And many Mac apps still use those code standards. So Apple would either have to weigh down iPadOS with legacy code, or create a toolkit similar to Catalyst that could swap legacy code for modern code that can run on iPadOS. I think the latter is far more likely, and watching Swift code, I believe that’s the direction we’re headed with Swift. One code base for your app, and support on every Apple platform. I don’t know why people assume I’m against Mac apps on iPadOS just because I don’t want to replace iPadOS with macOS.

Ported means you need the developers to want to do it. Many do not, or they make lesser versions for iPads. iPads running Mac apps natively eliminates that problem.

If a MacBook Air can run it, an iPad would be able to.

 

[TheWraith]

They are much closer than that. There’s only a few niche features that Finder has that Files doesn’t. They’re mostly the same.

You can put these words together, but it doesn’t make them mean anything. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[iPadified]

I do not understand the hate directed at people who ask for a better OS for the iPad. If you like iPadOS the way it is that is great for you because it does what you want it to do. For others, it does not. Apple should be receptive to ideas for improving the OS for everyone or be prepared to allow options. Allowing someone to install macOS on an iPad should be an option that Apple supports. If you do not want macOS on your iPad then do not install it. At a minimum, Apple should enable the option to install another OS like you can on a Mac. This would help to enable Asahi Linux to add support for iPad.

My hope for the investigation underway is that at a minimum Apple will be forced to provide the alternative OS installation option on all their devices. The best outcome for everyone would be to order Apple to allow installation options and that all Apple OS be open sourced, and by inference, all MS OS be open sourced as well.

We should not be locked in.

What is "better" and for who? That is the discussion we should have. Define who iPad is/shouls be designed for and typical use cases. Then define the features required to support these use cases.

 

[steve123]

What is "better" and for who? That is the discussion we should have. Define who iPad is/shouls be designed for and typical use cases. Then define the features required to support these use cases.

I think that is the underlying problem. The tool can be used for many different purposes by many different users. Different users have different use cases that can benefit to some degree from having a tool with different capabilities.

 

[iF34R]

I would like for developers to be able to use the power that the iPad has. Build options to use features when you do have a keyboard and mouse connected. Let game devs use the power that a 16GB M4 has, and so on. I don't need MacOS on it.

 

[heretiq]

Just my opinion, but Stage Manager is awful (on macOS). Slower and more cumbersome than a simple Mission Control hot corner. Which, Apple seems to tuck further and further away with each new macOS release. I think we can expect the same for Stage Manager.. a few marginal improvements here and there as it's slowly tucked farther and farther away in settings.

(And I realize you are talking about iPad OS)

Do you realize you can use Stage Manager and Mission Control together on the Mac? I use them both via simple Magic Trackpad left and 3-finger swipe-up gestures and enjoy (1) the benefits of each without compromise to either, (2) the benefits of both in combination, and (3) the exhilarating experience of these very intuitive navigation mechanisms.

My Windows-using team members are constantly asking me how I do that after seeing me effortlessly fly through docs/apps while sharing screens in meetings. I tell them it’s easy — just get a Mac.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

I haven't read the whole thread, but would I be right in thinking that some of the folks wanting more from iPads want something akin to a MacBook Air with a touchscreen and no attached keyboard? I can see the appeal in that, it would make for a super portable computer running more desktop-like workflows.

I wouldn't want one personally, as I would just get mad at it for having to clean the screen every couple of hours, and would end up turning it into a clunky MacBook Air with expensive accessories. I don't want overlapping windows, resizable windows, or even advanced multi-tasking on my iPad. That's not going to improve my usage in any way.

Maybe the iPad lineup should be adjusted a bit: iPad 11 & 13 for people like me, with configurable options at purchase to up specs to what currently is the Pro, and actual Pro versions of the 11 & 13 which are basically MacBook Air Nanos?

That seems like it would cover things for all of us. I can have my iPad 13 with iPadOS, and those who want more can have their iPad Pro with macOS! Win win!

 

[goobot]

I got m4 iPad pro day one and it was obvious nothing was going to be at wwdc. I tend to update my devices when they release good updates knowing future updates will probably be lackluster. Look at everything that came after the 2018 model up until now, basically identical

 

[fw85]

I hear the arguments against that for Windows and touch, and that's bull. You can select menus and options perfectly fine, everything's big enough. You don't need giant elements to use a touchscreen.

And improve iPadOS? How? By keep adding things until it becomes...MacOS? Might as well just use MacOS.

Except it's not bull, it's a significant part of the reason why something like the Surface line has struggled to ever turn a profit for almost a decade. Slapping a mouse-first OS onto a touch-first device is the kind of an idea that would typically get you laughed right out of a meeting with any half-decent UX designers.
Unless we're talking Microsoft's UX designers, which just stain anything they touch with garbage, frustration-inducing designs that have plagued their OS and all of their apps for a long time.

It precisely the people that are calling for this, who would be first to spawn threads ranting on about "oh why is macOS so clunky to use on my iPad, why can't they make it like touch-friendly or something??".
The same tired arguement from people who show an absolute lack of understanding about how operating systems work in general and what makes a good UX.

Why don't you just grab something like Jump Desktop and remote into your Mac from your iPad? It works nicely in full-screen, you can enjoy your dream experience of imitating a mouse with your finger. Or just buy a Surface, and see how many times you'll actually find yourself touching the touch-screen.
The rest of us who actually want a reasonable touch-first OS on a touch-first device should be calling for Apple to start properly focusing on iPadOS to refine it as much as it deserves, considering the hardware it's running on.

 

[Kal Madda]

Ported means you need the developers to want to do it. Many do not, or they make lesser versions for iPads. iPads running Mac apps natively eliminates that problem.

If a MacBook Air can run it, an iPad would be able to.

🤦🏼‍♂️. And I’ve said I’m ok with the idea of Mac apps running on iPad via some kind of emulation or something, I don’t know, but I doubt they’re going to add all that legacy code into iPadOS just to support some Mac apps, when they could create a system that could also modernize them. That’s just my opinion. So long as they don’t replace iPadOS with macOS, I don’t care how they add Mac apps, I’m not opposed to that idea. It feels like you’re trying to disagree with me on this when it seems like we mostly agree on this aspect. If you look through my forum history, I’ve talked about this several times. I’m not opposed to Mac apps on iPadOS, just macOS on iPad, just like I wouldn’t want iPadOS on Mac. If someone wants to create a macOS VM on their device, they can knock themselves out, but I don’t think it makes any sense to replace iPadOS or dual boot with macOS on an iPad…

 

[Kal Madda]

You can put these words together, but it doesn’t make them mean anything. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And you can put words together, but they don’t make any case against the facts I’ve stated. There are only a few niche differences between Finder and Files. I’m not opposed to the Files app incorporating these things, but trying to argue it’s junk and all these other things doesn’t make it so. I use Files practically on a daily basis, and I’ve never once had an issue with it, even running beta version of the OS. And as for the features, pretty much all of the primary features are there.

 

[cardfan]

Apple Intelligence is worth it. You’ll get a best-in-class AI experience with the latest and greatest iPads Pros. Calculator app, too.

Best in class? I must have missed something.

 

[Kal Madda]

Too many opinions here conflated as facts.

 

[MajorFubar]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its sub-par OS and mostly dumbed-down mickey mouse apps has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

 

[cardfan]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its dumbed-down OS and mostly sub-par apps that aren't as competent as their desktop equivalents has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

I thought it had something to do with running the oled screen. Apple doesn’t do anything without a reason.

And in that respect it’s a gorgeous screen. Best in class. That is why you buy an iPad Pro. An iPad has always been about eye candy.

To others this doesn’t matter. An iPad Air or base iPad does the trick.

 

[Kal Madda]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its dumbed-down OS and mostly sub-par apps that aren't as competent as their desktop equivalents has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

And iPadOS is quite capable, and not all apps are “dumbed down”. Just because a few developers like Microsoft have decided to artificially kneecap their iPad apps doesn’t mean there are no alternatives to those apps with full features, and doesn’t mean iPadOS is “dumbed down” either. Also, the M4 will allow apps like Adobe’s to make better use of AI features. If you never add better hardware, how should you expect software to improve? Hardware lays the foundation for software.

 

[heretiq]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its sub-par OS and mostly dumbed-down mickey mouse apps has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

I’m curious. Is this perspective based on experience or deduction?

 

[Abazigal]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its sub-par OS and mostly dumbed-down mickey mouse apps has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

My guess is that this is very likely a supply issue. Apple only has a limited quantity of M4 chips available right now, and it’s probably not enough to go into all their MBAs (Apple‘s most popular laptop). This leaves the iPad as the next best recipient, since the more expensive iPad Pro is probably going to sell in lower quantities.

 

[heretiq]

Ported means you need the developers to want to do it. Many do not, or they make lesser versions for iPads. iPads running Mac apps natively eliminates that problem.

If a MacBook Air can run it, an iPad would be able to.

As someone who leads operations for a 200+ person development company, consults with client decision makers and product owners on solution strategy / requirements / design and personally develops apps and writes code, my experience and observation is that no one approaches iPad development from the perspective of “let’s port an existing app exactly as-is to iPad.” The considerations and priorities are consistently:

1. Functionality - Identify the Pareto Subset (the proverbial 20% of functionality that delivers 80% of app utility)

2. Design - Simplify presentation and workflow (less is more)

3. UX - Make it intuitive by adapting app to deliver #1 and #2 in alignment with device/OS conventions

The net result is that a well defined iPad app is intentionally simpler than its corresponding desktop app — not because of iPadOS or Apple-imposed restrictions but because of product owner / developer choices to improve the product.

Now obviously there are some constraints that add development friction (e.g., device hardware and information access), but these are due to device and information security considerations, and the APIs are consistently evolving to expand and simplify secure developer access to these resources — not to lock things down as is implied in a number of comments.

Making macOS available on iPad would not be the panacea that it appears to be. That’s because doing so will allow wholesale circumvention of this app adaptation process and result in compromised UX — because the iPad is not simply a display. It is a system that is built from the ground up to support tablet operation with specialized hardware, firmware and software and thousands of optimizations across the stack. Simply porting macOS is the equivalent of a hack job and the results will show that.

If you really want to understand the reality and facts of iPadOS development just download the Apple Developer App and explore the thousands of videos and other resources that Apple invests in creating to assist developers. An honest assessment will reveal that app development is gated by app complexity and developer skills and effort — not Apple or iPadOS restrictions.

 

[goobot]

What I'm still struggling to get my head round is that an iPad with its sub-par OS and mostly dumbed-down mickey mouse apps has been the first device to get M4. I'm not sure what they're smoking in Cupertino RN.

Cheaper to produce than m3

 

[Rafterman]

Cheaper to produce than m3

My guess is, the M4 jut happen to be ready for the new iPad production cycle, so that's what they used. Maybe the Air would have gotten it first, if it was next up for a new refresh.

 

[ct2k7]

1. In Apple language "Pro" means "better". Why should not low and medium end user be allowed a better iPad? Who said computational power is not needed for low and medium end users? Please do not confuse complexity of software with compute requirements. iMovie is a low complexity app but still requires dedicated HW to get relatively fast exports. Many games have low user interface complexity (all shoot them up, RPG etc) but are still very compute demanding.
2. This is the problem. Who defines what is low or medium end usage pattern? How many are using VDI (whatever that is) and Citrix connection of iPad users (well outside our little club)? I my world that is high end usage. I agree killing processed such as that as well as video exports can be an improvement Apple can address especially if the iPad is connected to a powers source.

I define low and medium end users as those not requiring complex workflows: e.g. VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure, a quick search would have yielded that), writing notes, media consumption - even iMovie could be targetted at low-end users. The majority of these use cases do not require high-end hardware. Games are a different thing, I’d say they’re medium to high-end in workflow and does require sufficient hardware.

One definition of whether I test something to be low-medium vs high end in terms of use case is the multi-tasking (parallel, threaded etc) aspect. If a use case requires multi-tasking, it’s very unlikely to be low or medium primarily.

Pro may mean better, but it has different applications across the lineup, and it’s inconsistent.

 

[heretiq]

Cheaper to produce than m3

Thank you. That is an inspired and very considerate response. 🙏🏽