Why not MacOS on iPad Pro hardware?

[bscheffel]

Now that Apple is officially porting MacOS to ARM chips, it seems there isn't a technical barrier to allowing iPad Pro to dual boot MacOS/iPADOS. That would be my dream device - able to run both OS. If booting MacOS on iPad hardware I would just use mouse and not touchscreen as MacOS is not designed for touch.

Is there something I am missing on why this couldn't happen (other than Apple reluctance to do it)?

 

[thenewperson]

iPads have low amounts of RAM even at their highest end.

 

[bscheffel]

the 1TB Pro has 6GB RAM and I assume that amount will be standard on the 2021 iPad Pro. Not ideal but MacOS Big Sur will run on 4GB.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

What makes the situation even weirder is I'm absolutely expecting Apple to announce Macs with touchscreen support in the near future, just based on the visual design of Big Sur. It's clearly designed for touch, they made all of the interface elements just the right size to be good tap targets!

I just fundamentally don't understand Apple's strategy with iPadOS. They're clearly trying to make it into more of a "full featured" computer, but they already have an OS for that.

It's going to be really strange in a year when you can buy an iPad with an A-whatever chip and a detachable mouse and keyboard, or a Macbook with an A-whatever chip and a perminent mouse and keyboard, and the only real difference between them is they run semi-different operating systems.

Or maybe Apple does intend to let them dual boot. Who knows, they could surprise us... but it feels supremely un-Apple-like. There's the potential to create a lot of consumer confusion.

 

[JPack]

Fundamentally, Apple sells customized solutions they believe work best. They're not in the habit of a selling a Swiss knife and asking you to configure it. How come Apple TV doesn't have a web browser? How come HomePod doesn't have video output? They're fundamentally the same piece of hardware.

When you're buying a Mac, you're buying a computer intended for creators. That means a relaxed security model, more ports, and higher performance at the expense of battery life.

You'll notice iOS/iPadOS aggressively kills background apps regardless of the amount of RAM. That's due to simplified memory management and power efficiency.

There's no technical reason why iPad couldn't run macOS. But Apple doesn't believe you'll get the best experience so they don't allow it.

 

[thenewperson]

the 1TB Pro has 6GB RAM and I assume that amount will be standard on the 2021 iPad Pro. Not ideal but MacOS Big Sur will run on 4GB.

That's not really comforting still, considering all their Macs are 8GB standard at least. I feel at those amounts it's going to be noticeably slower due to memory. And all this for the novelty of running both? I just don't see it.

I just fundamentally don't understand Apple's strategy with iPadOS. They're clearly trying to make it into more of a "full featured" computer, but they already have an OS for that.

Important to note that iOS is touch-first and (until they make heavy revisions to most of their popular Mac hardware) macOS is KB/M-first. iOS apps (generally) have to perform well-enough without those accessories attached while a Mac app can reasonably assume they'll always be there. This may change, but even then I feel like it'll take a while before that happens. Also, adding to the 'low RAM' point above, the way iOS and macOS handle when memory is all used up. That's a big thing that macOS apps (and users) aren't really ready for. And given the ire that shows up anytime they adopt some iOS technologies something like that changing won't go well.

 

[edk99]

What makes the situation even weirder is I'm absolutely expecting Apple to announce Macs with touchscreen support in the near future, just based on the visual design of Big Sur. It's clearly designed for touch, they made all of the interface elements just the right size to be good tap targets!

I wouldn't read to much into that. I'm betting it is more about having a consistent interface (look and feel) across the various OS's than MacOS getting touch support.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I wouldn't read to much into that. I'm betting it is more about having a consistent interface (look and feel) across the various OS's than MacOS getting touch support.

Well, I suppose we'll see! I really am convinced touchscreen macs are going to happen, sooner rather than later. Consistent design is definitely a part of it, but almost every design change in Big Sur seems geared towards creating better touch targets.

 

[Tech198]

well. you already have the "stylist".. (opps. "Apple Pencil") so we could go back to the Newton days, only thing different would be better support. and gestures.

 

[leman]

The iPad, iPhone and Apple TV are perfectly capable of running macOS. But the user experience is going to be crappy. Applications designed for different input method etc. User experience is Apple’s main gimmick and the reason why they do almost everything the way they do it. They will definitely keep these things separate for as long as it makes sense to.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

The iPad, iPhone and Apple TV are perfectly capable of running macOS. But the user experience is going to be crappy.

I'll agree with regard to the iPhone and Apple TV, but an iPad with a Magic Keyboard? It's a screen with a mouse and keyboard, just like a laptop. I think macOS would run fine. And if they enabled the touchscreen, that would work fine too if you were using Big Sur.

 

[leman]

I'll agree with regard to the iPhone and Apple TV, but an iPad with a Magic Keyboard? It's a screen with a mouse and keyboard, just like a laptop. I think macOS would run fine. And if they enabled the touchscreen, that would work fine too if you were using Big Sur.

1. Yes, if the iPad has mouse and keyboard attached. But the point of the iPad is that mouse and keyboard are optional. Once you make them mandatory for user experience, well, that’s what a MacBook is

2. No, touchscreen won’t work good with Big Sur. The UI Framework is not designed to work with touch. Not to mention that everything is too small.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

2. No, touchscreen won’t work good with Big Sur. The UI Framework is not designed to work with touch. Not to mention that everything is too small.

Have you used Big Sur? I, as an experiment, have been tapping stuff on my Macbook Air, and I'm finding that just about everything is a comfortable touch target now. (Hence, again, why I really think touch screen Macs are coming.)

 

[reallynotnick]

the 1TB Pro has 6GB RAM and I assume that amount will be standard on the 2021 iPad Pro. Not ideal but MacOS Big Sur will run on 4GB.

6GB is already standard on the 2020 iPad Pro, only for the 2018 model did you have to get 1TB for 6GB.

 

[Kostask]

I have touchscreen PCs, and have had them since Windows 8. To be honest, after the first few days, I haven't bothered with using the touchscreen. It is possible to get around with a touchscreen, its more of a "why bother when you have a touchpad that is more precise, and closer to the keyboard" choice. I don't think it will be any different on a Mac laptop running MacOS. Sounds like a good idea in theory; just doesn't work in the real world.

 

[thenewperson]

I have touchscreen PCs, and have had them since Windows 8. To be honest, after the first few days, I haven't bothered with using the touchscreen. It is possible to get around with a touchscreen, its more of a "why bother when you have a touchpad that is more precise, and closer to the keyboard" choice. I don't think it will be any different on a Mac laptop running MacOS. Sounds like a good idea in theory; just doesn't work in the real world.

Agreed. Mac laptops (+ iMacs) need changes to their existing forms to make touch screens more worth it imo. With the stellar trackpads Macs come with, I'm not interested in having Macs with this addition.

 

[leman]

Have you used Big Sur? I, as an experiment, have been tapping stuff on my Macbook Air, and I'm finding that just about everything is a comfortable touch target now. (Hence, again, why I really think touch screen Macs are coming.)

I use Big Sur as a daily driver. I am aware that some are saying that the new arrangement and spacing suggest incoming touch support, but the primary layout of the UI elements are still mouse+keyboard oriented. Look at Windows 10 for example, their system menus etc. scream tablet UI. Big Sur interface elements are too small, too many to efficiently support touch. I don't see it working even on a 16" screen, let alone a 10" iPad.

 

[deconstruct60]

Now that Apple is officially porting MacOS to ARM chips, it seems there isn't a technical barrier to allowing iPad Pro to dual boot MacOS/iPADOS. That would be my dream device - able to run both OS. .....

Is there something I am missing on why this couldn't happen (other than Apple reluctance to do it)?

Two issues. Not permanent , insurmountable show stoppers , but show stoppers for the immediate future.

1. iOS/iPadOS devices only boot from iBoot. ( and the T2). The Apple Silicon (AS) Mac is going to boot something beyond iBoot. Perhaps not full UEFI, but something (call it mBoot for now) that can deal with external system images and booting in a reduced security mode. ( on T2 Mac it bouces to iBoot to get T2 fully runing and transition to UEFI to get x86 CPU fully running. On AS Macs there will be something close but not exactly like that. )

The primary issue is that iBoot has no options or feature for anything other than a single OS instance on a single internal drive directly managed by the SoC. The boot security of a iOS/iPad OS device is much tighter.

mBoot wouldn't be the same secure context as iBoot so going "backwards" would probably present some security problem vectors.

if Macs still have a very locked down, somewhat proprietary UEFI secure boot then going back to iBoot is probably is a even bigger security can of worms.


2. The DTK doesn't do virtualization opcode support the way eventual AS Macs will. But there are other aspects of the SoC that may be different. Support for different I/O.

If Apple went to market with a one-to-two port wonder MacBook with USB-C only then perhaps there would be high overlap in I/O with MacOS. But if AS Macs are all Thunderbolt 4 and iPad Pros are sticking with plain USB-C there is an I/O gap.


I don't really see the point though. If Apple wanted to do a "boot either one" then it would make more sense to make it a Mac product that also did iPad OS rather than the other way around.

In fact, if just did a PC like tablet computer , added a touch screen , and 360 keyboard (or detachable) then the "iOS" mode of macOS (where can run iPhone apps) could just be extended to iPad OS apps. Wouldn't really have to "dual boot" at all. Just run the iPad OS apps in macOS.

I doubt it goes that way though. More likely the iPad OS just picks up more macOS 'features' to run the option Keyboard (and Keyboard + trackpad ) mode better. Coupled with SwiftUI and Cataylst improvements more iPad apps will transition more seamlessly to running on macOS with and without direct programmer modifications. That also probably has side-effect of making them better at working in iPad OS keyboard+trackpad attached mode too.
In short, pretty good chance Apple is going to bring a wider variety of what used to be "macOS exclusive" apps to the iPad. Users on both "sides" ( macOS and iPad OS) will get a wider set of apps.


On point 2 though. I do suspect that Apple will create a SoC that can be shared across products between lowest Mac laptop and iPad Pro eventually. But more likely there will be features on the die that are turned on/off to match which side it is deployed in plus installed firmware differences.


for Point 1 iPad OS would have to fork off of iOS and drift toward a macOS security model. That is highly doubtful. And extremely likely wouldn't happen before Apple nukes the x86-64 variant of macOS and unifies macOS to being AS boot only (minus whatever mad scientist lab project they keep on the side as "plan b". )

 

[Wowfunhappy]

@deconstruct60 fwiw, Jailbreakers did get dual booting working with older iOS devices (so, they were able to dual boot into either iOS 6 or iOS 7, stuff like that). Don't know if it's more difficult today or if no one has bothered (it should be technically possible with chkm8).
[automerge]1600042166[/automerge]

 

[jerryk]

Moving to Apple Silicon does give the potential for hybrid laptop/tablet devices, like a Microsoft Surface Pro. But this time done with Apple OS and design skills. It could be an interesting device that switches the UI experience one changes from laptop to tablet. Apple obviously has skills in building great UIs for both environments.

 

[MalcolmH]

Not enough memory. Poor heat dissipation - it’s fine for hardware assisted video playback and web browsing but they throttle back if you push them. Designed for long battery life given typical use.

Macs have much better thermals (well maybe not so much the 12 inch MacBook).

 

[Woochoo]

Technical aspects aside (memory, thermal design, etc) it's pretty simple why: they wouldn't sell any Mac if you had the same/similar SoC and OS in an iPad Pro.

The entry level for Macbooks is 300-350 bucks more expensive than the entry level iPad Pro. And the most expensive 13" MBP is way more expensive than the most expensive iPad Pro. Not putting here the 15" as I doubt most people needing such a beefy computer with a big screen would replace it with a tablet (maybe some, but not such a fair comparison).

 

[leman]

Moving to Apple Silicon does give the potential for hybrid laptop/tablet devices, like a Microsoft Surface Pro. But this time done with Apple OS and design skills. It could be an interesting device that switches the UI experience one changes from laptop to tablet. Apple obviously has skills in building great UIs for both environments.

This is something I see working, but it is conditioned on all apps having two UI modes — one for Mac desktop and one for iPad. The technical base to create such apps exists now with Catalyst (it would need to be significantly expanded though) and SwiftUI should make it relatively easy to design adaptive interfaces. However, I just don't see enough developers going though all the trouble. As I wrote before, Apple is all about user experience. If a hybrid device would behave weirdly in respect to apps (not all apps able to do both modes), Apple won't do it. Makes much more sense to them to go the Continuity route this way they can sell you more devices too I expect some major advances in Continuity with Apple Silicon Macs anyway, since all Apple stuff will run on the same hardware you could probably just copy application state from one device to another.

 

[jerryk]

This is something I see working, but it is conditioned on all apps having two UI modes — one for Mac desktop and one for iPad. The technical base to create such apps exists now with Catalyst (it would need to be significantly expanded though) and SwiftUI should make it relatively easy to design adaptive interfaces. However, I just don't see enough developers going though all the trouble. As I wrote before, Apple is all about user experience. If a hybrid device would behave weirdly in respect to apps (not all apps able to do both modes), Apple won't do it. Makes much more sense to them to go the Continuity route this way they can sell you more devices too I expect some major advances in Continuity with Apple Silicon Macs anyway, since all Apple stuff will run on the same hardware you could probably just copy application state from one device to another.

I agree with your points, it appears Apple has already started to address these concerns. Continuity as it is today is a part of it. But I expect we will see even greater movement in this direction in things like UI controls which are getting a bit bigger to handle touch. I see opportunities and challenges for Apple's UI designer's future.

 

[NewUsername]

My dream:
All apps run on both iPadOS and macOS.
When you attach the Magic Keyboard iPadOS automatically changes into macOS.

Reality: zero chance, why sell one device if you can sell two?