All iPads Should the iPad become a Mac Replacement?

[heretiq]

Okay, now this just feels like a rerun of the "iPad as a laptop replacement" thread, but specific to Macs. Should this be merged and/or locked?

This thread was specifically created as a poll with background information in order to add value and not simply rehash old arguments. The poll is the goal and the contribution that differentiates it from other similar threads. The comments are a side-effect.

 

[floral]

This thread was specifically created as a poll with background information in order to add value and not simply rehash old arguments. The poll is the goal and the contribution that differentiates it from other similar threads. The comments are a side-effect.

If that's how you see it, sure. I once made an alternate thread for the Farewell Message in Community Discussion which had a focus on investigating developments to the OP's situation, and it was a WikiPost, but it was deleted by moderators for being a duplicate thread, so I thought this was one too.

 

[teh_hunterer]

iPad is lean back. Mac is lean forward. This is not changing, will never change, and Apple should stop goading people into thinking it could.

I really don't know who is the to blame...some users for demanding the iPad be morphed into a Mac, or Apple for caving and designing terrible iPad features like Stage Manager. But it needs to stop. iPad needs to remain iPad. Mac needs to remain Mac.

If Apple made a MacBook as small and portable as iPads, then I'd have no problem with this. As it stands, it has been many years since Apple has made a 2lb laptop, so the iPad is their only ultra light portable device.

And at the price of the iPad Pro, with the hardware inside it, I don't really see why it can't be a Mac when you connect it to a monitor/mouse/keyboard. You've already gone beyond the original simplicity of the iPad once you dock it to a monitor/mouse/keyboard, so I don't see why giving it a Mac interface and letting it run Mac apps in that scenario is a bad thing.

It's not like Stage Manager on external displays is worth preserving.

But a part of the reason people are banging the drum of iPads becoming more Mac-like is that it feels a bit tiresome to be carrying two devices when if you tweaked either of them they would be capable of replacing the other. You can only carry so much weight and bring so much stuff with you.

 

[anselpela]

If Apple made a MacBook as small and portable as iPads, then I'd have no problem with this. As it stands, it has been many years since Apple has made a 2lb laptop, so the iPad is their only ultra light portable device.

And at the price of the iPad Pro, with the hardware inside it, I don't really see why it can't be a Mac when you connect it to a monitor/mouse/keyboard. You've already gone beyond the original simplicity of the iPad once you dock it to a monitor/mouse/keyboard, so I don't see why giving it a Mac interface and letting it run Mac apps in that scenario is a bad thing.

It's not like Stage Manager on external displays is worth preserving.

But a part of the reason people are banging the drum of iPads becoming more Mac-like is that it feels a bit tiresome to be carrying two devices when if you tweaked either of them they would be capable of replacing the other. You can only carry so much weight and bring so much stuff with you.

There is nothing wrong with having 2 devices. People just don't want to pay for them. I'm happy to, to continue to have 2 different experiences. As similar as the hardware is, its NOT the same. So tired of reading that. An iPad can do a lot but cannot just be a Mac.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

There is nothing wrong with having 2 devices. People just don't want to pay for them. I'm happy to, to continue to have 2 different experiences. As similar as the hardware is, its NOT the same. So tired of reading that. An iPad can do a lot but cannot just be a Mac.

You forgot the “for me” part. I could use my M1 iPad Pro 12.9” as a Mac just fine.

 

[okkibs]

You forgot the “for me” part. I could use my M1 iPad Pro 12.9” as a Mac just fine.

I was on a trip with just the iPad recently and before leaving the hotel room I decided to download a newly released album for the way home. Ended up with a dozen mp3 files in my downloads folder and it was not possible to play that entire album. The iPad only allowed for a single song to be played in the Files app (or imported to apps like VLC/Infuse, creating a playlist was impossible because even when selecting multiple songs at once, only the first one was ever imported), after which I had to manually switch back to the folder and click on the next track.

Ended up not playing the album because obviously I can't interact with the iPad constantly whilst driving.

This is a minor thing but what if something more important unexpectedly comes up on a trip and turns out to be essential yet impossible to do on the iPad? There are mindnumbingly simple workflows that you don't even think about until you don't have the Mac around.

There is nothing wrong with having 2 devices. People just don't want to pay for them.

I have both Macbooks and iPads, the issue is with mobility. What use is the lightweight iPad on the go when many Pro apps only run via sidecar from the Mac (Ableton and Auto-Tune for example)? Many smaller tasks require the Mac too, for example I sync music to the AW for sports and it won't work without syncing that music to the iPhone first... which of course requires the Mac again, as the iPad doesn't interact with the iPhone, let alone the AW. It absolutely could allow AW pairing, but Apple limits device and feature support arbitrarily and inconveniences their users for no good reason. (If they just do it to sell more hardware, well, buying more hardware still doesn't change what the iPad can't do on its own...)

 

[Night Spring]

There is nothing wrong with having 2 devices. People just don't want to pay for them. I'm happy to, to continue to have 2 different experiences. As similar as the hardware is, its NOT the same. So tired of reading that. An iPad can do a lot but cannot just be a Mac.

We can continue to have two different experiences on a single device, if only Apple would make an iPad Pro that can dual boot into iOS and MacOS.

 

[teh_hunterer]

There is nothing wrong with having 2 devices. People just don't want to pay for them. I'm happy to, to continue to have 2 different experiences. As similar as the hardware is, its NOT the same. So tired of reading that. An iPad can do a lot but cannot just be a Mac.

There can be plenty wrong with having 2 devices if they overlap so much. As I just said, you can only carry so much weight and take so many devices with you. Devices must earn a place in your bag, and if I'm only going to carry so many things with me, maybe I'd rather dedicate the weight and bag space for a second device that actually does something different, like a Nintendo Switch.

My iPad or MacBook Pro could replace the other with some tweaking. If the iPad had more macOS features and software it could replace my MacBook. If my MacBook Pro had a touchscreen and the screen folded all the way around to the back, it could replace my iPad.

The main problem for me is Apple doesn't really make an ultraportable computer anymore. You used to have the 2lb Macbook. Now the closest thing you have to that is an 11" iPad + Magic Keyboard coming in at 2.4lbs. It's heavier, yet less capable. I don't necessarily expect Apple to solve this problem my way, but I do want them to do something.

 

[Ludatyk]

I was on a trip with just the iPad recently and before leaving the hotel room I decided to download a newly released album for the way home. Ended up with a dozen mp3 files in my downloads folder and it was not possible to play that entire album. The iPad only allowed for a single song to be played in the Files app (or imported to apps like VLC/Infuse, creating a playlist was impossible because even when selecting multiple songs at once, only the first one was ever imported), after which I had to manually switch back to the folder and click on the next track.

When users bring up examples like this... its more to do with finding that particular app, because apps like FileBrowser or NPlayer could have helped in situations like this.

This is a minor thing but what if something more important unexpectedly comes up on a trip and turns out to be essential yet impossible to do on the iPad? There are mindnumbingly simple workflows that you don't even think about until you don't have the Mac around.

But that essential yet impossible thing you brought up is possible to do on the iPad.

Many smaller tasks require the Mac too, for example I sync music to the AW for sports and it won't work without syncing that music to the iPhone first... which of course requires the Mac again, as the iPad doesn't interact with the iPhone, let alone the AW. It absolutely could allow AW pairing, but Apple limits device and feature support arbitrarily and inconveniences their users for no good reason. (If they just do it to sell more hardware, well, buying more hardware still doesn't change what the iPad can't do on its own...)

Bringing up an example like syncing music to the AW... what does this have to do with the iPad? That's more of a feature tied to the iPhone...

 

[Digitalguy]

The main problem for me is Apple doesn't really make an ultraportable computer anymore. You used to have the 2lb Macbook. Now the closest thing you have to that is an 11" iPad + Magic Keyboard coming in at 2.4lbs. It's heavier, yet less capable. I don't necessarily expect Apple to solve this problem my way, but I do want them to do something.

I agree, and that's also while I am happy to be someone who is perfectly fine with Windows (I actually overall prefer it to MacOS, although hardware-wise Apple Silicon is generally better than Intel/AMD). My Thinkpad X1 nano is just as light as my 12" MacBook and has cellular...
It precisely replaced my cellular 11" pro + Magic Keyboard (which doesn't get much use since) as my on the go device...

 

[teh_hunterer]

I agree, and that's also while I am happy to be someone who is perfectly fine with Windows (I actually overall prefer it to MacOS, although hardware-wise Apple Silicon is generally better than Intel/AMD). My Thinkpad X1 nano is just as light as my 12" MacBook and has cellular...
It precisely replaced my cellular 11" pro + Magic Keyboard (which doesn't get much use since) as my on the go device...

Yes it is precisely the fact that Apple silicon is such a game changer and can pack so much efficient power into small packages, that makes it strange that they don't have a really capable ultra portable Mac.

My hope is they're still cooking up a device that can really do it all, and getting it right and doing it the Apple way is what is making it take so long. I'm hoping it's this, instead of them considering the iPad to be their ultra portable device already covered.

The iPad is great, I'm glad it exists, and for some people it really is the device that can do everything they need. But for someone who needs a true desktop OS, and wants a very light device, the iPad just ain't it. An 11" iPad and Magic Keyboard is heavier than the MacBook from 2016, and the screen is smaller. We have Apple silicon now - this is silly.

 

[heretiq]

If that's how you see it, sure. I once made an alternate thread for the Farewell Message in Community Discussion which had a focus on investigating developments to the OP's situation, and it was a WikiPost, but it was deleted by moderators for being a duplicate thread, so I thought this was one too.

It is how the post was designed, not how I see it. Who knows, but I like to think the reason the post was not deleted for being a duplicate is because it isn’t — for the following reasons: (1) the clear and credible statement that it was a poll to measure something that was not previously measured, and (2) the inclusion of (seemingly lost) iPad design intent information to provide shared context for poll responders.

Of course, while the poll may not be a duplicate, that doesn’t mean that some of the comments aren’t rehashed arguments. But if you look closely I think you can find lots of thoughtful comments that added to the admittedly endless debate. I got the numbers I was looking for, learned some new things and changed my mind on certain things. All-in-all mission accomplished from my perspective. 🙏🏽

 

[heretiq]

Yes it is precisely the fact that Apple silicon is such a game changer and can pack so much efficient power into small packages, that makes it strange that they don't have a really capable ultra portable Mac.

My hope is they're still cooking up a device that can really do it all, and getting it right and doing it the Apple way is what is making it take so long. I'm hoping it's this, instead of them considering the iPad to be their ultra portable device already covered.

The iPad is great, I'm glad it exists, and for some people it really is the device that can do everything they need. But for someone who needs a true desktop OS, and wants a very light device, the iPad just ain't it. An 11" iPad and Magic Keyboard is heavier than the MacBook from 2016. We have Apple silicon now - this is silly.

Agree 100% @teh_hunterer. Hoping to see a fast, light, nimble and “really capable ultraportable [AS] Mac.” And I’m willing to pay a premium for it.

 

[iPadified]

It is how the post was designed, not how I see it. Who knows, but I like to think the reason the post was not deleted for being a duplicate is because it isn’t — for the following reasons: (1) the clear and credible statement that it was a poll to measure something that was not previously measured, and (2) the inclusion of (seemingly lost) iPad design intent information to provide shared context for poll responders.

Of course, while the poll may not be a duplicate, that doesn’t mean that some of the comments aren’t rehashed arguments. But if you look closely I think you can find lots of thoughtful comments that added to the admittedly endless debate. I got the numbers I was looking for, learned some new things and changed my mind on certain things. All-in-all mission accomplished from my perspective. 🙏🏽

I think the thread is nice as it let us discuss how high complexity iPadOS should reach before it looses it appeal as a user friendly, fast and multitasking device. Here, I refer to multitasking as driving a car, flying a plane, meeting clients, proceedings in courts, teaching, constructions, music concerts, kitchen work, treating patients with the assistance of a computing device.

Personally, I like the iPad to stay true to its main interface which is the touch screen interface and being a low complexity device supporting these professions, and paying the bills at home.

Mac fanatics, as usual, only keeps adding what cannot be done on the iPad aim to reduce iPad to a Mac. Yes, reduce. at the same time, I do not think MacOs should get too much inspiration from iPadOS either because it is an OS for specialists.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Mac fanatics, as usual, only keeps adding what cannot be done on the iPad aim to reduce iPad to a Mac. Yes, reduce. at the same time, I do not think MacOs should get too much inspiration from iPadOS either because it is an OS for specialists.

I don't really understand this dichotomy. macOS is for specialists like iPadOS is for babies and people's grandparents - ie, not really.

People get too caught up in sides. iPads aren't just Fisher Price toys that you can't get any real work done on, but they also aren't magically capable of replacing a computer with a desktop OS for most working people. Yet you have people claiming both of these things all the time.

The ultimate solution to this never ending argument comes down to what Apple is thinking. As I pointed out, they don't currently make an ultra portable Mac like they did back in 2016 with the 2lb MacBook. If Apple is going to make such a device in future, then sure, leave the iPad alone. But if Apple isn't making an ultra portable Mac because the iPad exists, then I'm sorry, but the iPad doesn't currently cut it and it needs to evolve beyond its simple roots.

This drum is going to be beaten until Apple either brings the iPad up to Mac level, makes an ultra portable Mac, or makes some sort of actual hybrid. Until then, the argument will never stop. The horse has left the barn and people rightly expect Apple to do something better with the ultra portable segment of the market in 2023.

 

[heretiq]

..
Personally, I like the iPad to stay true to its main interface which is the touch screen interface and being a low complexity device supporting these professions, and paying the bills at home.

Mac fanatics, as usual, only keeps adding what cannot be done on the iPad aim to reduce iPad to a Mac. Yes, reduce. at the same time, I do not think MacOs should get too much inspiration from iPadOS either because it is an OS for specialists.

..
The ultimate solution to this never ending argument comes down to what Apple is thinking. As I pointed out, they don't currently make an ultra portable Mac like they did back in 2016 with the 2lb MacBook. If Apple is going to make such a device in future, then sure, leave the iPad alone. But if Apple isn't making an ultra portable Mac because the iPad exists, then I'm sorry, but the iPad doesn't currently cut it and it needs to evolve beyond its simple roots.
..

I think I can square these seemingly opposed comments. I believe @iPadified is saying that the iPad as a touch first device works well for certain professionals and consumers in its current form .. and attempts to make it more Mac-like will degrade the iPad for those who want an iPad and not another Mac device. I agree with this completely. The iPad has a distinct character and UX which is preferable for certain tasks and it would be disappointing to lose that in the attempt to make the iPad more Mac-like.

I also agree with @teh_hunterer observation that the lack of an ultra-portable Mac is a major contributor to the demand for a more Mac-like iPad as the current iPad is an inadequate substitute for a Mac ultra-portable.

I really hope that Apple can make you both (and me) very happy by realizing these are two distinct markets: one that wants the iPad to evolve but stay true to the original iPad design intent; and another (perhaps of people willing to pay a premium) for a performant ultra-portable Mac. 🤓

 

[Boil]

WWDC 2018 - Are you merging iOS and mac OS...? No...!

But that was in regards to iOS, not iPadOS...

Maybe the rumored larger iPad (14" & 16") models, some call them Ultra, some say Studio; maybe those WILL have a macOS Lite or something...?

I could see a multi-touch tablet being the continued evolution of the Macintosh, and combining it with mixed reality googles (eventually glasses) for "more" while on-the-go...

iPad / iPad mini / iPad Air can fill the role of strictly tablet; while iPad Pro & iPad Studio fill the role of tablet plus...?

 

[iPadified]

I think I can square these seemingly opposed comments. I believe @iPadified is saying that the iPad as a touch first device works well for certain professionals and consumers in its current form .. and attempts to make it more Mac-like will degrade the iPad for those who want an iPad and not another Mac device. I agree with this completely. The iPad has a distinct character and UX which is preferable for certain tasks and it would be disappointing to lose that in the attempt to make the iPad more Mac-like.

I also agree with @teh_hunterer observation that the lack of an ultra-portable Mac is a major contributor to the demand for a more Mac-like iPad as the current iPad is an inadequate substitute for a Mac ultra-portable.

I really hope that Apple can make you both (and me) very happy by realizing these are two distinct markets: one that wants the iPad to evolve but stay true to the original iPad design intent; and another (perhaps of people willing to pay a premium) for a performant ultra-portable Mac. 🤓

I fully agree with this sentiment and dual boot is an excellent "cheap" way to achieve this.

I don't really understand this dichotomy. macOS is for specialists like iPadOS is for babies and people's grandparents - ie, not really.

I think you misunderstood my post, which is in itself interesting.

The MacOS people needs the terminal, multiple screens, multiple windows (more than two), mountable disks, specialist high end software, backward compatibility etc. I see these a specialists features usable for a few. For my list of professions, these features are meaningless as the primary interaction are with other machines, fieldwork or human-human interactions.

Pixel precision mouse/trackpad input to interact with small features and the ridged keyboard/screen/trackpad work environment (ie the clamshell) of Macs are simply not cut out for some of the listed jobs. We hang on to old computer paradigm aimed for specialists preferably sitting at a desk (ie the original PC) and these thoughts are still dominating MR especially in iPad forums.

 

[teh_hunterer]

I think you misunderstood my post, which is in itself interesting.

The MacOS people needs the terminal, multiple screens, multiple windows (more than two), mountable disks, specialist high end software, backward compatibility etc. I see these a specialists features usable for a few. For my list of professions, these features are meaningless as the primary interaction are with other machines, fieldwork or human-human interactions.

Pixel precision mouse/trackpad input to interact with small features and the ridged keyboard/screen/trackpad work environment (ie the clamshell) of Macs are simply not cut out for some of the listed jobs. We hang on to old computer paradigm aimed for specialists preferably sitting at a desk (ie the original PC) and these thoughts are still dominating MR especially in iPad forums.

I'm afraid I don't really understand much of what you're saying. You seem to want to characterise traditional desktop computing as antiquated and irrelevant to all but a few "specialists". This is on the level of someone on the other side claiming the iPad is useless except for old people who want to watch videos and post on FaceBook.

People aren't hanging on to old ways of doing things so much as they are existing in the real world and having to do real things for a living, sometimes complicated things. But that's not really my point.

My point, which you seem to have missed, is neither device is perfect - there are some things that an iPad is best at, and some things that a Mac is best at. What is "dominating" MacRumors is a lack of nuance, and this idea that that iPad is either a) a toy you shouldn't use for real work, or b) the new way of computing and if it doesn't fit perfectly for you, you're the problem.

I just don't find that compelling. What I find compelling is what Apple is going to do next. Do they think the iPad is a replacement for their ultraportable MacBook, and will keep bringing it up towards the Mac? Or are they cooking up a MacBook 2016 Apple Silicon redux? Or some sort of hybrid device? As I said, this argument is going to be rehashed over and over until Apple does one of the three. There is a hole in the lineup and people aren't going to stop noticing.

 

[okkibs]

its more to do with finding that particular app, because apps like FileBrowser or NPlayer could have helped in situations like this.

Again, I tried a couple apps like Infuse and VLC and nothing worked on the spot. The free version of Nplayer started showing unskippable ads when I tried the import and ended up crashing during, not very confidence-inspiring for buying the regular version. FileBrowser looks amazing, unfortunately since I store customer data on my devices I cannot use third-party apps that can access all files. Granted, that is more restrictive than what would be considered usual.

Next time I have some other issue I might need it to work right then and there, and then asking this forum and waiting for replies wouldn't be feasible. So far it hasn't happened yet, but that might just be because I bring the Mac along most of the time to make sure I don't run into unforeseen problems.

Bringing up an example like syncing music to the AW... what does this have to do with the iPad?

The topic here is iPad replacing the Mac, and in order to sync music to the AW you absolutely need to go through the Mac first (and then the iPhone). That's my point, there are things even within Apple's own (hardware) universe that flat out require a Mac and can't be done by an iPad. If you have just an iPhone and an iPad you'll find that you won't sync your music onto the AW, period. And that's a huge part of why I bought it, for sports when bringing along the iPhone is inconvenient.

It's not like I bought some incompatible third party hardware where I could go "my bad, should have just bought Apple's hardware", this is an Apple limitation with their own devices, where they inconvenience their customers on purpose.

That's more of a feature tied to the iPhone...

Precisely! Apple arbitrarily decided to tie the AW to iPhones so that one purchase necessitates the other. There is no actual reason for this in the first place, other than Apple prioritizing their bottom line at the expense over the customer's experience. That's bad design. I already own all these devices, there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to choose to sync the AW with the iPad after "activating" it once with my iPhone. And similarly there is no reason why some tasks have to remain Mac-only. The iPad could do many of the Mac-exclusive things, without having to install 3rd party apps, Apple just doesn't care.

 

[George Dawes]

In my experience the iPad is a toy and if I want to do anything approaching what I’d call actual work I go straight for my Macs

 

[Digitalguy]

I fully agree with this sentiment and dual boot is an excellent "cheap" way to achieve this.

I think you misunderstood my post, which is in itself interesting.

The MacOS people needs the terminal, multiple screens, multiple windows (more than two), mountable disks, specialist high end software, backward compatibility etc. I see these a specialists features usable for a few. For my list of professions, these features are meaningless as the primary interaction are with other machines, fieldwork or human-human interactions.

Pixel precision mouse/trackpad input to interact with small features and the ridged keyboard/screen/trackpad work environment (ie the clamshell) of Macs are simply not cut out for some of the listed jobs. We hang on to old computer paradigm aimed for specialists preferably sitting at a desk (ie the original PC) and these thoughts are still dominating MR especially in iPad forums.

I disagree with most of this vision of "MacOS people". I am not strictly a MacOS person (since I use Windows for work and MacOS mainly for entertainment), but the point is the same.
First and foremost a lot of those wanting the iPad for more want it as a laptop replacement for on the go, not necessarily as a desktop or only device (unless they already have a work laptop, and at that point it's not a "only device" by definition...). Most don't need terminal or mountable disks, they don't even need more than 2 windows on the same screen. What they need is:
- background apps, that is the ability to move from one app to the other without any ever reloading or stop working in the background (not having the screen split in 5 windows, which make little sense in a small screen), for instance via a taskbar or something else (including gestures)
ISSUE with this: it will expose the fact that iPads have smaller batteries than Macs so they would last much less
- desktop software (but not necessarily specialist high end ones), such as full Office (not the half backed version currently available), full locally/background synced cloud software like Dropbox for instance (not the mobile version) and outside the US desktop versions of apps like Whatsapp (whole businesses are managed on Whatsapp in Europe for instance).
ISSUE with this: there is nothing Apple can do to iPadOS. It's up to those software houses, which should no interest in making those apps for iPad (some of them for competition reasons).
- centralized file management with the ability to assign default apps to file types and open them from the file app.
ISSUE with this: none, but it means changing the philosophy on which IOS was built (apps centric instead of file centric)

 

[ericwn]

In my experience the iPad is a toy and if I want to do anything approaching what I’d call actual work I go straight for my Macs

And what are these actual work tasks you’re unable to do on the iPad?

 

[okkibs]

And what are these actual work tasks you’re unable to do on the iPad?

I don't agree at all that the iPad is a toy, but I did mention some actual tasks that the iPad can't do...except with workarounds that require a Mac, such as sidecar to run Ableton, Auto-Tune and others. Ableton works super well with sidecar, but even if I have a Mac that can run these apps, the moment I leave the house that workaround falls apart too. Not to mention that it's a bit silly to get both an iPad and a Mac, just so you can use that sidecar workaround. At that point you might as well just use the Mac. And I mentioned other things as well that flat out require a Mac.

 

[ericwn]

I don't agree at all that the iPad is a toy, but I did mention some actual tasks that the iPad can't do...except with workarounds that require a Mac, such as sidecar to run Ableton, Auto-Tune and others. Ableton works super well with sidecar, but even if I have a Mac that can run these apps, the moment I leave the house that workaround falls apart too. Not to mention that it's a bit silly to get both an iPad and a Mac, just so you can use that sidecar workaround. At that point you might as well just use the Mac. And I mentioned other things as well that flat out require a Mac.

Thanks - we all find the occasional thing our iPads could be better at - but I was specifically interested in the post I quoted.