iPad Pro Seriously, STILL NO KEYBOARDS FROM 3RD PARTIES?????

[flapflapflap]

THIS IS RIDICULOUS. Can anyone offer any explanations as to why there have NOT YET BEEN any third party smart connecting keyboards for the iPP????? OTHER THAN THAT MONSTROSITY FROM LOGITECH?

Is Apple restricting compatible keyboards into the marketplace until they can sell x amount of their own Smart Keyboards? Is demand weak (weak sales of iPP)? How freaking difficult is it for any of these third parties to develop a keyboard?

 

[kupkakez]

Zagg, Brydge and Clamcase......

A simple google search would have answered this..

 

[flapflapflap]

Yes, I'm aware. I am referring to keyboards that are compatible with the iPP's smart connector.

 

[Michael Goff]

I'd say we're not going to get one until some numbers come out.

 

[double329]

There are few available now, but I don't really like them. They are bulky and just don't fit well. Good feature though... There are some that looks promising, but won't be available few few months. As of now, I have to stick with Apple keyboard.

 

[flapflapflap]

A few more months? You're then forced to keep the ASK. Terrible.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

You've clearly never been a decision-maker in a manufacturing business. "Hey, Apple's coming out with a whole new product, with a whole new connector. Do we make one now, or wait and see how things develop?" "Is this going to be really big? If so, it might be worth rolling the dice." "Doesn't seem likely - it's on the high end of the price spectrum, and iPad sales in general haven't been all that thrilling."

Maybe Apple did not make the specifications for the connector public beforehand. Maybe they did. I don't know for sure. They have the MFI program, they have a history of selling third-party products and apps... They're not afraid of "competition" - they've known that the right third-party app or accessory can sell a lot of product since before the day Microsoft introduced Word for Mac. So I'd park any conspiracy theories by the door.

 

[Ledgem]

Probably because it doesn't make much financial sense to do so. The smart connector is only used on the iPad Pro, which is expected by many (including Apple, it seems) to be the weakest-selling of the iPad line. Meanwhile, every iPad and other tablet includes Bluetooth support. It costs a lot less for a company to adapt keyboard chipsets and designs and scale them to the iPad Pro, than to make a potentially major modification so that the smart connector can be used. I'm not surprised that the majority of the keyboards that have come out for the iPad Pro utilize Bluetooth over the smart connector.

 

[Pakaku]

It costs a lot less for a company to adapt keyboard chipsets and designs and scale them to the iPad Pro, than to make a potentially major modification so that the smart connector can be used. I'm not surprised that the majority of the keyboards that have come out for the iPad Pro utilize Bluetooth over the smart connector.

Which makes me wonder why Apple even made a Smart Connector in the first place, if Bluetooth works just fine.

 

[maflynn]

Which makes me wonder why Apple even made a Smart Connector in the first place, if Bluetooth works just fine.

Maybe its for the future, they might have other ideas on using that to extend the usefulness of the iPad Pro

 

[OllyW]

Even Apple are not that sure how successful it will be. The Smart Keyboard for iPad Pro is still only available in a US English keyboard layout making it a compromised choice for users outside the USA.

 

[lk400]

This thread reminds me of that Louis CK but about people complaining about planes. Look it up.

 

[nightcap965]

Which makes me wonder why Apple even made a Smart Connector in the first place, if Bluetooth works just fine.

The Smart Keyboard doesn't require its own power, it gets it from the iPad Pro connector. No plugs. No pairing. No charging.

 

[yillbs]

It doesn't make sense that apple added a completely new way to transfer data, and power and only include one accessory. I'm going to guess they have much bigger plans for this smart connector.

 

[flapflapflap]

It doesn't make sense that apple added a completely new way to transfer data, and power and only include one accessory. I'm going to guess they have much bigger plans for this smart connector.

Apple panicked, in my opinion, because of the SP3/4. Microsoft's success, though not over the top, is growing, and they've established themselves as market leaders in a new segment -- laptop/tablet hybrid. This new segment not only competes directly with Apple's iPad line, but also Apple's Macbook line. The SP line clearly needs a lot more work, but their growth and increasing popularity probably scared Cook.

That's why Cook quickly introduced the iPP. It's still a great device, IMO. I have one, and chose it over the SP4 after testing both devices. But I think an Apple historian would probably agree that Apple didn't spend too much time/thought on this device. Let's face it, they just blew up the size of the iPad Air 2, took advantage of its PRE-EXISTING iOS features like Split-View, decided to throw in a smart connector with a mediocre keyboard cover to trick the everyday consumer that the iPP and SP4 were similar devices.

In short, the iPP, was introduced to thwart Microsoft's momentum. If Apple really thought the future of computing would be in the form of a tablet, they would have spent more time/thought and added more features/functions.

 

[yillbs]

Apple panicked, in my opinion, because of the SP3/4. Microsoft's success, though not over the top, is growing, and they've established themselves as market leaders in a new segment -- laptop/tablet hybrid. This new segment not only competes directly with Apple's iPad line, but also Apple's Macbook line. The SP line clearly needs a lot more work, but their growth and increasing popularity probably scared Cook.

That's why Cook quickly introduced the iPP. It's still a great device, IMO. I have one, and chose it over the SP4 after testing both devices. But I think an Apple historian would probably agree that Apple didn't spend too much time/thought on this device. Let's face it, they just blew up the size of the iPad Air 2, took advantage of its PRE-EXISTING iOS features like Split-View, decided to throw in a smart connector with a mediocre keyboard cover to trick the everyday consumer that the iPP and SP4 were similar devices.

In short, the iPP, was introduced to thwart Microsoft's momentum. If Apple really thought the future of computing would be in the form of a tablet, they would have spent more time/thought and added more features/functions.

those are all probably true, however, I am curious to know what YOUR idea of what the alternative would be ? What can they really do to compete with a full OS surfacebook? Mac OS x isnt' touch screen, so they can't make a hybrid. Putting a desktop CPU in a portable like this would be useless, very very few apps would take advantage of it. At that stage they have to make a mac "RT " version if you will ( compared to windows RT ). Short of designing a completely new OS, how are they supposed to compete without the IPP ?

 

[Eric5273]

The operating system is fine and so is the hardware. The apps and accessories just need to catch up to support the new device. It will happen, and probably rather quickly, but it's only been 2 months, so give it at least a little time.

 

[yillbs]

The operating system is fine and so is the hardware. The apps and accessories just need to catch up to support the new device. It will happen, and probably rather quickly, but it's only been 2 months, so give it at least a little time.

My question was specifically to flapflapflap , he said " But I think an Apple historian would probably agree that Apple didn't spend too much time/thought on this device. ", so I asked how exactly does apple compete with windows when they are pushing hybrids with full desktop Operating systems? He said Microsoft was taking a lot of sales from them, so apple released a " thrown " together device. so, if that's the case, what does apple release in order to compete if not what they did?

 

[Ledgem]

But I think an Apple historian would probably agree that Apple didn't spend too much time/thought on this device. Let's face it, they just blew up the size of the iPad Air 2, took advantage of its PRE-EXISTING iOS features like Split-View, decided to throw in a smart connector with a mediocre keyboard cover to trick the everyday consumer that the iPP and SP4 were similar devices.

In short, the iPP, was introduced to thwart Microsoft's momentum. If Apple really thought the future of computing would be in the form of a tablet, they would have spent more time/thought and added more features/functions.

If Apple's marketing is to be believed, features like split-view were developed alongside the iPad Pro. They were expecting to elevate tablet productivity and were already shifting toward iPad-specific productivity features in iOS. The iPad Pro contains a few unique hardware tweaks compared to the standard iPad that makes it clear Apple didn't just "blow up the size of the iPad Air 2," which further shows forethought on Apple's part. They didn't just pop it out in a few months. What features began developing at what time relative to the actual products is something that only Apple really knows, though.

Apple claimed that data and power could be transferred through the smart connector, but I don't think anyone outside of Apple knows what its full capabilities are. I would imagine that Apple has greater plans for the smart connector than just a keyboard for the iPad Pro. Perhaps it will eventually be a feature that helps to differentiate all iPads from iPhones; we'll have to see.

I like the Surface. I think it's a really neat idea, and I wish that Apple wouldn't be so hasty to trash it and claim that they'll never create a merged product. But trashing their competitors is what companies do, and Apple has rarely been the one to lead with an entirely new concept. Their strength is in releasing a solid implementation of technologies and ideas. If the Surface continues to gain momentum, my guess is that Apple will eventually come around to the idea, as well.

 

[yillbs]

If Apple's marketing is to be believed, features like split-view were developed alongside the iPad Pro. They were expecting to elevate tablet productivity and were already shifting toward iPad-specific productivity features in iOS. The iPad Pro contains a few unique hardware tweaks compared to the standard iPad that makes it clear Apple didn't just "blow up the size of the iPad Air 2," which further shows forethought on Apple's part. They didn't just pop it out in a few months. What features began developing at what time relative to the actual products is something that only Apple really knows, though.

Apple claimed that data and power could be transferred through the smart connector, but I don't think anyone outside of Apple knows what its full capabilities are. I would imagine that Apple has greater plans for the smart connector than just a keyboard for the iPad Pro. Perhaps it will eventually be a feature that helps to differentiate all iPads from iPhones; we'll have to see.

I like the Surface. I think it's a really neat idea, and I wish that Apple wouldn't be so hasty to trash it and claim that they'll never create a merged product. But trashing their competitors is what companies do, and Apple has rarely been the one to lead with an entirely new concept. Their strength is in releasing a solid implementation of technologies and ideas. If the Surface continues to gain momentum, my guess is that Apple will eventually come around to the idea, as well.

^^^^ This

 

[Cashmonee]

Apple panicked, in my opinion, because of the SP3/4. Microsoft's success, though not over the top, is growing, and they've established themselves as market leaders in a new segment -- laptop/tablet hybrid. This new segment not only competes directly with Apple's iPad line, but also Apple's Macbook line. The SP line clearly needs a lot more work, but their growth and increasing popularity probably scared Cook.

That's why Cook quickly introduced the iPP. It's still a great device, IMO. I have one, and chose it over the SP4 after testing both devices. But I think an Apple historian would probably agree that Apple didn't spend too much time/thought on this device. Let's face it, they just blew up the size of the iPad Air 2, took advantage of its PRE-EXISTING iOS features like Split-View, decided to throw in a smart connector with a mediocre keyboard cover to trick the everyday consumer that the iPP and SP4 were similar devices.

In short, the iPP, was introduced to thwart Microsoft's momentum. If Apple really thought the future of computing would be in the form of a tablet, they would have spent more time/thought and added more features/functions.

If you believe that Apple just threw together the iPad Pro in a few months to respond to Surface, then I think you are way underestimating the time it takes to create a product. I would venture that the Pencil alone has been in research and development for a few years. I would also agree with others that features such as Split View were actually iPad Pro features first that were introduced early. I do not believe Apple saw a Surface Pro 4 and decided to make an iPad Pro the next day. Look at the screen (with Pencil support), the processor, the connector, speakers, etc. All of that says that a lot went into this product, and that it has been in development for some time.

 

[countryside]

If you believe that Apple just threw together the iPad Pro in a few months to respond to Surface, then I think you are way underestimating the time it takes to create a product. I would venture that the Pencil alone has been in research and development for a few years. I would also agree with others that features such as Split View were actually iPad Pro features first that were introduced early. I do not believe Apple saw a Surface Pro 4 and decided to make an iPad Pro the next day. Look at the screen (with Pencil support), the processor, the connector, speakers, etc. All of that says that a lot went into this product, and that it has been in development for some time.

This.

Pretty much sums up what I was planning on posting.

 

[Eric5273]

Companies like Apple have people in R&D that are planning hundreds of products and working to make them production ready. Then at the end, Apple chooses a few of them to actually produce and sell. My guess is that Apple has potential products ready to compete with just about every item produced by every one of their competitors. Whether or not they decide to actually produce them is something they decide in the later stages.

So yes, I'm sure they have had the iPad Pro idea ready for quite some time, but now they finally decided to produce it, perhaps in a response to Microsoft's surface. The idea that the largest company in the world needs to throw together a product at the last second to sell is absurd.

 

[yillbs]

Companies like Apple have people in R&D that are planning hundreds of products and working to make them production ready. Then at the end, Apple chooses a few of them to actually produce and sell. My guess is that Apple has potential products ready to compete with just about every item produced by every one of their competitors. Whether or not they decide to actually produce them is something they decide in the later stages.

So yes, I'm sure they have had the iPad Pro idea ready for quite some time, but now they finally decided to produce it, perhaps in a response to Microsoft's surface. The idea that the largest company in the world needs to throw together a product at the last second to sell is absurd.

lol ABSURD I TELL YA!

 

[IHelpId10t5]

Because the iPP is not a laptop! If you needed a laptop then you should be using a MacBook or Air. Everybody including 3rd part keyboard manufacturers seem to understand that except the OP.