Heck I would be happy if iPadOS simply allowed Mac Finder and Mac Apps to be installed. That would be the best of both worlds. Specify which binary you want and go.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
All iPads Should the iPad become a Mac Replacement?
- Thread starter heretiq
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've tried both Nplayer and FileBrowser, both were able to create a playlist for me. But those apps I use are paid version. But FileBrowser doesn't store customer data.. at least, it doesn't specify that in the App Store.
But the Apple Watch is a device that's tied to the iPhone... it has no baring on the OS limitation of the iPad. Can the Mac sync music to the Apple Watch without the iPhone?
While I too am frustrated by how the Apple Watch is tied to the iPhone, and we can't sync data between Watch and iPad (you want to sync music, I want to view my health/fitness/activity data on the iPad), I think the problem is a bit more complex than Apple prioritizing their bottom line or they just don't care. Syncing data among three devices (iPad, iPhone and watch) is a lot more complex than just two, and Apple would also want to create an iPad interface for this, instead of just expanding the iPhone apps. So considering the number of people who have iPhones versus those who have iPads, I can understand Apple considering it a low priority to make watch data sync with iPads.
As for the main topic of this thread, I find it interesting that people have started bringing up the need for an ultraportable device. As I recall, the original iPad landed in the middle of a "netbook" wave, and effectively killed that market. It was better at the kind of ultra mobile computing, like emails and light computing, videos on the go, and browsing the net, that those netbooks were being used for.
The thing is, an iPad Pro with magic keyboard is physically the modern version of those netbooks. But what is it FOR? It's overkill for people who do light computing on the go. A regular iPad without keyboard is good enough for that. For people who want to do more complex computing tasks, the iPadOS and mobile version of apps are too limiting. It feels like a product without a sense of real purpose.
MacOS/Macs does not and never has met the computer need for a lot of job situations. iPad meets other job situations not covered by Macs and the iPad does that OK or perfect. Are we not talking about the same thing?
How can you conclude that I think MacOS is antiquated? I said it was for specialists needs.
If you lack a ultraportable Macbook would not the easiest solution be to take the old 12 inch and put an MX into it?
Dual boot would be preferable so that they can stop bastardizing iPadOS and just let it be what it wants to be. But does no one even stop to look at the iPad Pro and the MacBook Pro and realize that...the iPad hardware is not a Mac. So what if it "can" run macOS in theory because 1 component, the main SoC, is the same(ish)? That doesn't mean the entire system is the same. Or that it could run it well enough to be a replacement for a MacBook Pro.
This is absolute utter nonsense. The Apple Watch is a tiny, baby version of an iOS device, and from day one the Apple Watch has leveraged iPhone as much as possible to improve its performance and user experience. To this day Apple Watch still only has 2.4G WiFi, and works infinitely better when iPhone is close by, than it does on its own.
Series 6 & later have 6GHz compatability: https://support.apple.com/en-au/HT209071
Also, I find that the (cellular) watch works well without a phone nearby, but of course YMMV.
It's all syncing though, syncing my music to the iPad requires the Mac as well. Importing photos directly works, although it's badly implemented. There is no justification for Apple to neglect their own apps in such a way. Not like these apps do anything crazy, especially the Music.app has such a bare minimum of functionality and the sync literally just copies the files over, not like it converts anything.
And for the AW in the interest of simplicity it would suffice to allow the AW companion app on the iPad and allow pairing to an iPad so that users have the choice and aren't forced to buy an iPhone (I own an iPhone exclusively for the AW, my daily driver is a Pixel). None of this is unreasonable or complex to implement.
I don't quite agree. I do not own a magic keybard, instead I got a bluetooth keyboard and mouse (and often a monitor as well) at all my usual locations and just bring the iPad along if possible. My 14" MBP weighs as much as 3.4 M1 iPads and not having to carry all that around nearly every single day of the week ends up making a difference. Enough of a difference that I spent the money on a new iPad.
I would not bring a magic keyboard just for the fact that it's as heavy as the iPad itself if not a bit heavier and turns the iPad into what's essentially a worse Macbook Air. And I can get by with the touchscreen for a while.
But what if you have multiple purposes for a device? Maybe one day you draw with it, the next you want to edit a video real quick, and another you actually edit video more intensely. I'll buy a single iPad that can handle all workflows and for me that meant at least M1 with the extra memory so Stage Manager works properly (it closes background apps more often on the 6GiB models).
Yeah some mobile apps are just unusable or simply don't exist, like Ableton. For work I do a lot in web-based apps that run in websites so what I need is an iPad that doesn't run out of memory and starts closing "inactive" tabs that are actually the IT ticketing system, for example, can keep up PiP mode without starting to lag like my older 9th gen iPad, and so on. There is a middle ground the high-end iPads are great for.
The only iPads I see no use for are the M1/M2 versions with 16GiB RAM. If the iPad was good enough to actually replace my Mac, then the heavier use could justify that super expensive iPad hardware, but as long as I need to keep the Mac for a couple workflows anyways, I see no point in these iPads. (The extra free space is also absurd, practically I couldn't use it, there are few supported video formats I can sync from the Mac over 10Gbps, and I am not gonna fill up 2TB over Wifi and then manage them over the Files app to add insult to injury, lol...)
The AW has 5GHz, who talks "utter nonsense"... I use the AW mainly for workouts, music, and Apple Pay when I am on the go - entirely offline without my iPhone. There isn't a single thing I need the iPhone for except that it needs to be connected sometimes to sync new music and to keep Apple Pay working. If I could pair it with the iPad for that, it would work just the same for me. There is absolutely nothing I need "leveraged" from the iPhone to "improve" any "experiences". What even is your reasoning here?
The iPad has trained me to use my finger as a pointing device, and the iPad itself as my main computing device. When I switch back to my MacBook for more heavy duty computing, there’s always a moment when I find myself tapping the screen and wondering why it doesn’t respond. Give me a touch screen MacBook and I’ll be a happy camper.
Background apps. Please give examples when you actually run things in parallel. I mean actually executing things simultaneously. Video converting is probably the mainstream longer background operations you want to have but most people only want to switch between passive windows and have lots of them. Music streaming is another. Exporting a movie in one part of Split View while streaming movies or answering mails in the other part works fine. I think that is acceptable. Reloads, well 16 Gb will get you far but I agree, the RAM management can be improved. Perhaps I have very simple demands. Multiple windows and background movie exports etc is not something you generally do when teaching or sit in meetings or flying an aircraft.
Desktop software. Look at the list of jobs I made. Dealing with desktop software is not on the radar. Desktop software is for when you sits alone at your desk. The Mac and MacOS was designed for exactly that job situation so why not use a Mac? I do. I recently tried Sharpr3D for iPad. Very nice and it works as good as Fusion360 at least for the simple stuff I made. However 3D modelling is mainly desktop work preferably using large screens so a Mac is better.
Centralised file management. Are you sure you got this correct? The files app let you put files where ever you like locally or in the cloud (I think also LAN drives but I am unsure). The files app let you open a document from everywhere. I frequently uses the files app to access Onedrive and open all sort of files that way. Apple Apps and Microsoft Apps let you access the tree structure inside the apps. I basically use Finder in the same way.
I use Macs, iPad, iPhones and winPC in my work. They are good at different jobs. Mac: desktop centric work, iPad: computing on the go including teaching and meetings and winPC for scientific instruments and specialist software. Personally, I do not want that to change. None is obsolete, not even winXP(!).
Totally agree!
See, this is what I envision I would do if I still commuted to work at an office. But at the office, I'd likely want the full MacOS instead of just the iPad OS. In my mind, a M1/M2 iPad Pro that dual boots between Mac and iPad OS would make sense to use in this way -- keep keyboard/mouse/external monitor at home and office, use MacOS at those locations, use as touch screen tablet on iPad OS during commutes or otherwise on the go.
The iPad killer situation is when the keyboard is in the way when carrying out the main task. For instance, I assume people will not be allowed to operate a car with Mac OS, keyboard and trackpad instead of touch displays with large icons. Operating a car while driving is an example of real mobile computing (sorry for the pun): the computer is only helping while driving.
Why do I chose the 12.9 inch for work? Large display for drawing while teaching, annotating pdfs without zooming and low latency when teaching. I really do not want to wait even three seconds for anything when lecturing for 100 students. You are very far from the desk while teaching and the experience is more like driving a car in very heavy traffic.
Biggest issue I have with many commenters: they seem to think of traditional desktop tasks (writing, coding, video work etc) and apply those to the iPad.
I get the point however that is a very bad example as interacting with devices is not allowed, the only exception being permanently installed ones that come with the car and even those are reported to be distracting as you have to take your eyes off the road to interact. If an iPad was ok to use then we'd have the reaction times of drunk people, and texting would be allowed as well. The law does not make a difference between "computer" or "smartphone" or the size of the screen.
It's the kind of thing Apple would never want - otherwise they could have long done that, MacOS could boot on these iPads easily and actually did with the first Apple Silicon Mac Mini for developers that was essentially an iPad in a Mac Mini body, before the M1 released. Apple wouldn't want this as it would necessarily open up the iPad to full file system access, integrated unix utilities like dd that can directly modify the partition table and so on. And Apple were never the ones to hide some "pro" mode deep in the settings that suddenly unlock another layer. iPads for the foreseeable future will work exactly as Apple intends them to, leaving nothing up to the user.
The only hope I have is that Apple keeps seeing the light and introduces many more features like Stage Manager, which I find to be just about the most important iPad feature in the entire iPad's history. Initially I had my problems with iPads and the limited apps, but tried adjusting and I can see value in the simplicity, sometimes computers annoy me to the point where I need a vacation in the jungle away from anything that uses electricity, and the iPad teaches me that it can be nice to just not do x or y, or work around it in a different way.
I actually meant permanently installed ones. Those are all touch based. I mean the screen in a Tesla could just as well be an iPad and some software.
Voted: Yes - the iPad should become a general Mac replacement. I think it should be a Mac replacement sometime in the future, but it's far off.
In its current form it may be too limited. But say it folds in half, giving the option to use it like a MacBook on your lap, some software enhancements; could work. Professional use would be furthest in the future, for most.
In its current form it may be too limited. But say it folds in half, giving the option to use it like a MacBook on your lap, some software enhancements; could work. Professional use would be furthest in the future, for most.
You gave some examples yourself. Let me give an important one for me. I want my Dropbox to sync my files in the background without me ever opening the app. I create/change a file on my desktop, it immediately syncs to my iPad as long as it's connected to the Internet, even if I am not using it. Then I go out, I am in a place where there is no Internet and I can open my file (ideally from the file app) and use it offline.
I don't need multiple windows, I don't use them even on Windows, if I need 2 windows at the same time I use an external monitor (another thing that should be possible, using an iPad as an external monitor with another iPad or at least with Universal control without a Mac).
There are already desktop apps like Davinci Resolve (not even optimized for touch) and now Final Cut and Logic. Plus some desktop music apps and library have recently come to the iPad. But others won't come (fully or at all) for competition reasons (Microsoft Office and Whatsapp) or because desktop developers don't care about the iPad not because it's impossible.
I think you misunderstood my point. I am talking about default apps. Being able to assign an app to a file type. Not possible. I don't want to have to open apps first. I want to open files and assign apps to a file type. Even Android allows you to do that.
That's because the iPad has mouse and keyboard support and Apple sells mouse and keyboard accessories. And because professional writing, coding and video work applications are on the iPad, including Apple's own Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro.
What exactly is your issue with these commenters?
This! You’ve highlighted an important factor @okkibs : “adjusting” our expectations to matching the device’s design intent vs engaging in eternal strife by expecting a device that was defined and designed for one purpose to yield to our will and conform to our wants and desires. I’ve had that experience with numerous Apple “innovations” where I initially disliked it but then tried it and “adjusted” to it to discover that I liked the new way better than what came before. Some examples include: mouse vs Magic Trackpad, home button vs gestures, Touch ID vs Face ID , TouchBar, iPad with touch interface vs Mac for certain use cases, and Stage Manager to name a few. In almost every case, Apple‘s choices were ones I would not have asked for but turned out to be better than I expected — because their profession is to come up with innovations that I wouldn’t/couldn’t imagine. For this reason I strive to stay open-minded and give Apple the benefit of the doubt.
There is absolutely no reason other than corporate greed as to why the iPad can't also be a Mac replacement. None whatsoever. I get the argument for wanting to keep the tablet/iOS experience pure. Great, then allow us to dual boot if we want. The hardware on the iPad shares the same DNA as current Apple Silicon MacBooks. There is NO technical reason that won't allow iPads to run MacOS.
Most companies are revenue-driven - call it greed if you like. Few - very few - operate with altruistic motives and I wouldn't expect Apple to do so.
There's the headache of managing/adapting MacOS to iPad for a smaller screen both for Apple and for software developers.
While I might be sympathetic to the idea of a dual/boot iPad device if it truly preserves the original iPad design intent, I disagree with the oversimplification that this capability is not provided purely due to greed on Apple’s part.
Dual boot alone will not allow MacOS to run and deliver a satisfactory MacOS experience. For one, the smaller iPad touchscreen would require supporting changes in MacOS. Second, Apple is disciplined in optimizing system resources to meet designed use cases (that goes for processor, storage, memory, power where there is typically little to no excess capacity laying around) — so even if the MX CPU and GPU are adequate to run both OSs, I suspect the current MX ROM and other off SOC subsystems such as power might need to be re-engineered to accommodate both iPadOS and MacOS.
As such, a dual-boot iPad is likely to require changes to hardware as well as MacOS (to accommodate iPad hardware) and probably iPadOS (to play nicely as a dual boot vs dedicated OS) and will likely be different and more expensive than the iPad as we know it today.
Then there is the question of user experience and demand to name a couple more considerations: Will it deliver an exceptional or degraded MacOS experience? Is there sufficient demand at the associated price point(s) to justify the effort to prep and manufacture it?
Net-net: The point of all this is to explain the belief that the lack of a dual boot iPad is perhaps due to more than greed on Apple’s part.
Not for the 12.9"...it's the same size as a MBA. I don't even care about dual boot. Let me choose. I will load Mac OSX and be done with it. I don't even really buy the "ton of work" stuff. They literally have one set of components in each pro with tons of overlap. Do it on the M1 (and up) iPad Pro line and be done with it.
There is now a definitive reason for the pro line to exist and we will happily buy them. If you still want to run iPadOS, then you can do that on your Pro...