I’ve owned many iPads over the years, starting with the first one when it launched in 2010. Steve Jobs’ keynote introducing the iPad was a masterclass in product vision, clearly articulating why the iPad existed: it has to excel at tasks over and above the Mac or iPhone, like web browsing and reading books. Jobs also spoke of the need for trucks... even though mobile devices like the iPhone and iPad were appealing, he talked about the need for what he effectively was referring to as the Mac, the equivalent of a truck vs. more efficient cars like the iPhone and iPad.
Over the years, there’s been endless debate about whether the iPad should become more like a Mac with a Mac-like OS or if the Mac should adopt touchscreen capabilities like an iPad. The iPad will never be a Mac, and the Mac will never be an iPad. Each device is designed for a distinct purpose, and these design philosophies are fundamentally different for several reasons:
With AI, I think the iPad will become even more appealing to more people, as AI has the power to automate a lot of what we do, even in a professional setting, making manual input less needed. But regardless, we will still need the "trucks", as Jobs said, so Macs aren't going anywhere anytime soon. But a truck is not a car, it isn't trying to be, and it will never be.
Over the years, there’s been endless debate about whether the iPad should become more like a Mac with a Mac-like OS or if the Mac should adopt touchscreen capabilities like an iPad. The iPad will never be a Mac, and the Mac will never be an iPad. Each device is designed for a distinct purpose, and these design philosophies are fundamentally different for several reasons:
- Form Factor and Screen Size: The iPad’s smaller screen is a consequence of its tablet form factor, meant to be handheld. This inherently limits its productivity compared to larger laptop or desktop screens that can display more information simultaneously.
- Input Methods: The iPad is designed around multi-touch input directly on the screen, which is intuitive for certain tasks but lacks the precision of a mouse and keyboard setup: mouse arrows are precise to 1 pixel. Professional tasks often require this level of precision, which is why the Mac’s keyboard and trackpad, with their pixel-level accuracy, remain superior for those needs.
- Performance Constraints: The iPad’s CPU and GPU capabilities are constrained by its design as a fanless, battery-operated device. This results in a limited thermal envelope, preventing sustained high performance. In contrast, Macs, especially when plugged in, can utilize more power and better cooling systems, making them capable of handling more demanding professional applications over extended periods. For tasks requiring consistent, high-level performance, such as video editing or software development, the Mac’s design advantages are clear where the iPad will suffer more thermal throttling.
- External Display Support: The iPad lacks the ability to drive multiple high-resolution monitors, a feature crucial for many professional workflows. Macs, particularly the MacBook Pro and desktop models, excel in this area, providing significant productivity gains through extensive multi-monitor support. This capability is essential for tasks such as coding, graphic design, and financial trading, where multiple displays enhance efficiency and workflow management.
- Mac’s Trackpad vs. Touchscreen: The Mac already incorporates multi-touch through its trackpad, which is more ergonomic and efficient for desktop use than a touchscreen. It's as if people forget about this. Lifting your arms to touch a screen repeatedly is impractical and slower compared to using a trackpad. Additionally, macOS is optimized for precise input, not the broad gestures suited for touchscreens. The mixed success of Windows 8, which attempted to bridge touch and mouse inputs, underscores the challenges of such an approach. Even Steven Sinofsky, the former President of Windows, has acknowledged that this convergence doesn’t work well.
- Software Ecosystem and User Experience: The software ecosystems for iPadOS and macOS are tailored to their respective hardware. iPadOS is optimized for touch interactions and mobile apps, excelling in areas like media consumption and lightweight productivity tasks. In contrast, macOS supports a vast array of professional software, offering a desktop-class experience for complex tasks. Attempts to merge these ecosystems risk diluting the strengths of each platform, leading to a compromised user experience.
- Ergonomics and Usability: The iPad’s design prioritizes portability and ease of use for casual and on-the-go tasks. It is perfect for scenarios where holding the device in hand or using it in various orientations is beneficial. The Mac, designed for desk use, focuses on ergonomics suitable for prolonged use with peripherals like external keyboards and mice, providing a more comfortable experience for extended work sessions.
With AI, I think the iPad will become even more appealing to more people, as AI has the power to automate a lot of what we do, even in a professional setting, making manual input less needed. But regardless, we will still need the "trucks", as Jobs said, so Macs aren't going anywhere anytime soon. But a truck is not a car, it isn't trying to be, and it will never be.
