There is a distinction, but that’s not relevant in this regard. iPadOS is just a blown up and updated version of iOS which still doesn’t feature a build in weather app. It really isn’t very advanced. macOS is, however.
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.
iPad The iPad is not for traditional Mac users
- Thread starter Retskrad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Weather app is not part of the OS. It is part of the utilities that Apple provides for free just like Safari. Rule of thumb: if you see an icon, it is an app. How it functions is to some degree determined by the OS but not much. Its functions is mostly determined by the app maker.
Why do app makers decide not to give those apps to me on an iPad? There's millions of iPads in use, seems an obvious market to tap. You know the reasons: they're exactly what I've said they are, you're just skirting round the edges of saying them.
EDIT: I'll give you a clue. See my reply below to user 'darngooddesign' on post #381.
Last edited:
You do realise, don't you, that you're fundamentally agreeing with me that the reason I can't use an iPad for tasks I can run on a 12 year old Mac Mini is because the iPad isn't up to it, despite having a phenomenally more powerful processor.
Did you think think that the iPad not being able to run apps which don't exist for its OS was some kind of gotcha? I mean, there are lots of apps and games which run on ten year old PC that won't run on a brand new MBP, because they don't exist for its OS.
However you can with Emulation or Remote Desktop apps.
Last edited:
No, it's because even the most expensive iPad has the image of being a toy for watching YouTube and drawing pretty pictures, and app developers don't believe pro-sumers will pay Win/Mac app prices for desktop-class iPad apps. Aided and abetted by an underdeveloped OS which makes doing things that are simple in Windows and MacOS a complete ballache, and as even you yourself have identified, is further crippled by imposed limitations (e.g.: doesn't have swap), so you have to buy a hugely expensive one with a silly amount of RAM to do things you can accomplish with a twelve year old Mac with 4GB RAM and a hard drive made from spinning plates of rust.
What would you say the reason is?
I used iPad from the very start, in 2011.
I am still using Mac Mini 6 and my household has 2 more ipads.
In general, iPadOS hasn't developed much from 2011.
And our usage pattern hasn't evolved either, even with pens, keyboards, mice.
PadOS is really stuck in 2011, which is shame, because M1 in notebooks and desktops shines, but in iPad it is not utilized really. Why would you need M1 to open Safari in a toilet?
I am still using Mac Mini 6 and my household has 2 more ipads.
In general, iPadOS hasn't developed much from 2011.
And our usage pattern hasn't evolved either, even with pens, keyboards, mice.
PadOS is really stuck in 2011, which is shame, because M1 in notebooks and desktops shines, but in iPad it is not utilized really. Why would you need M1 to open Safari in a toilet?
Well said! As a former Mac user now 100% iPad only, I completely agree. Other people won’t (or don’t want to) see the benefits and that’s fine. Just look at the comments here against this post and you’ll see it. If you prefer the Mac OS and it’s quirks then good for you. Likewise if you prefer iPad Os and it’s quirks…good for us! iPad is amazing.
I often think what Apple have done and are trying to do with iPad is take all the lessons learned from the last 20-30 years of computing and build a modern computer for (most not all) people. In that they have been successful, but it’s not about trying to make a computer for everyone. Some people drive trucks, I don’t drive a truck, I don’t like trucks and I don’t need a truck. I also don’t get upset with people who do need to drive a truck, to each their own!
Because as proven by the relatively small number of iOS apps which have been re-compiled to run on MacOS, by simply checking a box mind you, developers don't want to have to support another OS that requires constant testing for new OS versions each year and point versions throughout the year. Because in most cases a mouse/keyboard-optimized interface designed for the mouse isn't best when translated to a small screen, so the UI would need to be redesigned; even Adobe knows this which is why the iPad software is different from the desktop software. Add to that the number of people willing to buy an 1TB iPad so it has the enough RAM to run desktop apps well AND a keyboard/trackpad case is tiny. Because in our world of streaming music, in-app purchases, and bithcing about subscription prices, people are less likely top pay desktop software prices for iPad apps.
TLDR - Stick with MacOS because iPadOS will never give you what you want because there aren't enough people willing to pay all the costs associated with running desktop software on their expensive iPads.
I agree, while it's true that iPadOS can be improved and become better, what's more important to just have the tools that work best for your needs. Some folks just want as few tools as possible, others are fine with having an exact tool for each task, both are completely valid.
TLDR: the design is fundamentally flawed meaning only a tiny percentage of users would be able to buy and use desktop-class apps for their top-of-the-line iPads. We would appear to agree on this. We would appear to only disagree on the point that you think iPadOS limiting the potential usability of a device with an M1 processor is perfectly fine.
(Useless information: last week I ordered a new iPad to replace my ancient mk1 Air. But I've gone for the poverty-spec base-model iPad 9, because I don't see the point in buying a better one for my uses, seeing all the same fundamental limitations apply.)
Only a tiny percentage of users would be willing to pay for not only a 1TB 13" iPad, which is what you would need for the necessary RAM and a screen large enough not to feel cramped with a desktop UI, sidecar is an easy way to see that an 11" screen simply isn't large enough for MacOS apps, and the high cost/subscription price of an iPad specific version of the app.
Yup, have to agree. I work with Macs but when my private life starts the Mac stays in the office and the iPads take over. There’s certainly plenty use cases for both, and pretending that’s not the case just leads to endless exchange of hollow opinion pieces.
Can't wait for the M3 iPad to come out in 2024/25: running hugely processor-intensive apps like Youtube , Twitter and Safari on a device probably more powerful than my M1 Studio Max while I sit on the loo having a poo is going to be awesome.
I guess I could really tax it's abilities and maybe draw a picture.
I guess I could really tax it's abilities and maybe draw a picture.
On the other hand, they will run Illustrator, Capture One, Lightroom, Affinity Designer, Procreate, Remote Desktops, Parallels, etc. like a champ. It sounds like the issue is that your imagination is more lacking than iPadOS.
Bring on the M3 iPads....can't wait.
Last edited:
Well put. Or:
Apple just really needs to improve the Studio as I still can’t use it on the loo. Even though it’s running a beefed up iPad chip.
The fact that you think an Air 2 can run current, top-spec design and creative software well means you don't know anything about those apps. But don't be cranky just because the developers of the apps you want know there aren't enough people willing to pay for a top spec iPad and desktop app prices for an iPad version of the app. You think the market is there, they know it isn't.Corrected that for you
Here is my list.
1. Most desktop software is for mouse and keyboard input and the software needs a rewrite for touch. Software developers cannot assume keyboard and mouse on iPad.
2. The screen real estate is small. It does not make sense to require an external screen to run software on iPads.
3. Willingness to pay. This is less of a problem because complex software is usually for companies. However , the lack of side loading makes the software 30% more expensive than on a Mac.
So from a business perspective it makes little sense to provide desktop apps to iPads as long as Mac/PC exists.
True, perception is important and it is not boosted by people such as you and the majority of YouTubers that uses descriptions such as “toy” and “only for consumption”. It reflects your capabilities to use the iPad and not capabilities of others or the potential for other use cases.
I saw you bought a base iPad. It is impressive how much iPad you get for a relatively small investment! I would love a 12.9 version of the base iPad.
If you believe there is a significant proportion of us who believe the image of the iPad is hobbled by its perception as an expensive toy for consuming content, can't you agree that should change, considering how potentially great the iPad could be? And can't you agree the image is a side-effect of Apple knobbling the OS, along with other imposed limitations, such as no swap, and an inability to load apps from outside the app store (I never thought of this, you did, and it's very valid)?
Correct. I'm really looking forward to receiving it, not least because my ancient Air is stuck on iOS 12 so I can't run most modern apps. Had there been a 12.9 base iPad I probably would have bought it (53 years old eyes not what they were...). But I can't justify the price of even a new Air when for my purposes it would offer zero extra functionality.
I think its worth reminding people of the netbook. These really small laptops featured non-standard keyboards and screens, but at the time the iPad appeared they were selling quite well. And guess what? The whole product category disappeared in about three years, because tablets were just so darned convenient.
To me that proves that the iPad has a solid role in the computing ecosystem. Is the iPad all it could be, or could it be a little better? I think the fact that it is out-selling the Android tablets by a large margin means that iPadOS is closer to the ideal than anything the Android manufacturers or Microsoft’s Surface team have yet come up with. And I think Apple knows this, and thats why they are going slowly.
Maybe the primary use case for the iPad really is as a web surfing, media consuming, single app computer.
I think netbooks disappeared because they sucked - I had (still have, actually) a Samsung netbook. Grossly underpowered and incredibly sluggish, it wasn't good for doing much of anything; even the simplest tasks were a drag on it.
No, they didn't. PC industry just changed its name. Now it's EVO whatever...
I think it needs to be established if you guys are talking about “complex or sophisticated” from the developer’s perspective or the user’s perspective. Obviously from a user’s perspective, iPadOS is simpler than macOS (and of course overly simple to some users). So I think what the other user probably means is that iPadOS is more sophisticated than macOS under the hood, in some ways, just like an automatic transmission is more sophisticated than a manual transmission from a mechanical perspective, but automatic provides the simpler experience for the user. Of course, some people prefer the more direct control (and mechanical simplicity) of a manual transmission, which allows them to have greater flexibility in driving decisions.
By the way, I’ve never understood the iPhone/iOS comparison as an argument against iPad/iPadOS’s validity. Just because the iPhone is small? It’s an irrelevant argument. The reason it doesn’t make sense: what if iPadOS was an undisputedly powerful OS that did everything everyone wants, and Apple also had that OS in the iPhone but without the bigger screen features like split screen, etc.—then someone could still say that iPadOS is “just” a bigger iOS. Yes it is, but that’s not saying anything of value.
Jumping into the discussion. By ”should” if you mean Apple owes it to humanity to change the iPad to what we want, I don’t think so. Could Apple do it? I think that’s a given. Could they do it without compromising their vision for the iPad or the experience for their target buyer? I don’t know. Could they do it without hurting their bottom line? I don’t know, but it doesn’t seem like it. And if not, I would never expect any company to do anything to hurt their bottom line, unless it’s to abide by the law or refrain from destroying the environment (and humanity).