This is basically the answer. In that, they already have a MacOS that uses iPad apps, all they really need to do is work on touch just a bit and give us that on an IPP. No dual booting, just make MacOS “touch” available on IPPs with access to all the iPad apps. It’s not easy, but I think transferring resources to this instead of using them to slowly make iPadOS more Mac like would be the way to do it. iPadOS can otherwise stay close to what it is today with less effort than things like Stage Manager.
If Cook, Federighi, Srouji, Schiller (emeritus), or ANYONE from Apple is listening, I’ll waive any and all claims to this brilliant idea (which I should have patented) - just put it out this September.
Add $300 (for MacOS - bet it would be more like $500) to a special SKU of the current iPad Pro 11 AND 12.9 with 5g, 16gb ram, 1-2tb ssd, and it will sell like hotcakes and spike your overall iPad sales through the roof without even having to change the design…
OR is that what secretly have in mind for 2024 with the new top end OLED model with landscape camera/dynamic island?
PS - while we’re at it, no more Magic Keyboard for the 11" - go as sleek and lightweight as you can with the iPad 10 style keyboard/kickstand, and keep the Magic Keyboard boat anchor for the 12.9" (and above - see how I snuck that in there).
There is a quote from Ballmer in his memo for his “Trustworthy Computing” initiative, intended to address MS’ reputation for bugs in Windows and Office:
“About 20 percent of the bugs causes 80 percent of all errors, and–this is stunning to me–1 percent of bugs caused half of all errors.”
He is referring of course to the well-known 80-20 rule. What is not as commonly known is that the rule applies to itself; that is, within the 20% of faulty code, only a small portion is actually responsible for most of the 80% of bugs. By the numbers, it looks like this:
- 20% code → 80% errors
- 4% code → 64% errors
- 0.8% code → 51.2% errors
This is how Ballmer arrives at his observation that 1 percent of bugs that cause half of all errors. So in other words, you could check your code meticulously—to the point that 99.2% of faulty code is revised and rewritten–and still have over half the errors affecting your system.
Many people here wonder, hey, if Gustave Monce can single-handedly get most of Windows running on the Duo, why can’t MS spare the effort? The answer is 80-20. Getting the OS 80% running is relatively easy, but dealing with the rest of 20%>4%>1% of faulty code requires exponentially more effort.
Unfortunately, not addressing that pesky 0.8% of code means, you’ll likely have show-stopping bugs in the production environment: crashes, data vulnerabilities, inconsistent user experience—all of that nowhere near ready for a “Pro”-level Apple product.
So in answer to your question of how much work can it take?
To get the OS working? Easy. To get it working stably? Very difficult.
You’d need a dedicated software team, continually patching and committing code to a separate branch of the MacOS kernel to make dual-booting/mode-switching feasible. It’s sad, but this is why most interesting ideas can never be realised in a large company, the liability and continued costs are simply too great.
I just don’t get this. If you treat the M1 iPad Pro just like a M1 MacBook Air (with same ram and ssd sizing) why is this the case?
To @Marty 's point, just getting touch alone working in MacOS will be an enormous undertaking and not to mention what you would need to do for pen support. After all Apple has had over ten years perfecting touch support in IOS.
And @dstrauss I think you would be among the complainers if it was not implemented at all and/or in a limited fashion compared to IOS
Not mention that the iPad screen resolutions and aspect ratios don’t match any current Mac display and you have yet another pile of work/code to address
And lastly, I’m virtually 100% sure that Apple’s own customers would not accept a “gimped” version of an iPad that even if it was dual boot, would lack support for pen/touch. They’d be crucified in the Apple media sphere as well.
In other words, very little upside including sales for what would be an enormous engineering effort. And again besides us here and a vocal contingent on some of the blogs, the appetite/desire for something like this is in the broader base, is likely fairly small and would be even less so if it drove up the price.
There are so many developer tools these days that make finding bugs so much easier that I’m not sure this rule applies as well as it once did. Not that it’s not at least still partially true, but it’s so much easier now to even just get useful error messages and to understand them. And yes, I’ve been that developer who, while working on a non-show stopper bug accidentally introduced a showstopper in a release. But that was before we had a more robust pipeline for those checks.
And I am by no means saying it would be easy. I just think the tools we have today make coding easier than it ever has been, and the ROI might actually be there now, when it wasn’t 5 years ago.
In the converse, why do they support iPad apps on the Mac with NO HOPE for either pen or touch?
You been hanging out with @Marty expecting me to explain why a company does what it does?
Seriously though I think its a perception /expectation thing. In other words, the Mac gains additional albeit limited functionality in running some (though far from all or even the majority but primarily games) apps where as running Mac OS apps with out the IOS marquee feature which is touch is perceived a negative.
In other words Mac users already don’t have touch so allowing some apps with the crutch/handicap/workaround of using keyboard/mouse is a net positive.
EDIT: or to be more cynical as you yourself have postulated, why deny themselves the opportunity to sell another device?
Two better than one, unless you charge the same for one…
Hey, hey, don’t drag me back in the ring yet!
I gave it my all on my last post, and there was no moving him! (I know who I’m hiring to represent me in court haha.)
I mean well this is good, actually. The one thing I stopped short of saying was, yes, large organizations are too risk averse to try something like dual OS on one device—but also—it takes an (unreasonable/relentless) visionary like Jobs, to actually push anything new and worthwhile through.
So I salute you, @dstrauss! With more of your enthusiasm, I starting to think Apple might actually give the MacOS direction a harder look.
Actually, I think the market is going to FORCE them to give us MacOS or MacOS-lite sometime in the next two years. Stage Manager is a farce if you are a professional or productivity focused user; Files is totally inadequate; and people are not going to keep buying ever higher priced iPad Pros just for iPaddy stuff. In deference to my buddy @Desertlap I am likely wrong on this, but I really think there are a TON of us out there who want a replacement for the MacBook 12 - with performance chops and a real keyboard - just the spot to be filled by the iPP11.
Still, I for now and have retired the M1 iPP11 to photo management and editing duties…
Glad I surrendered for now - look at this from 9 to 5 Mac about Final Cut Pro for iPad Pro:
“And if you thought you could use an external display with your iPad to have more area for Final Cut, unfortunately, this won’t work. Since the app doesn’t support multitasking, it won’t run fullscreen on an external display, either.”
Just curious, what part of the market do you think will actually put pressure on Apple?
A lot of tech influencers and journalists have been commenting for years that IPP needs to get more Pro apps and file management. So far, Apple has been quite leisurely glissading in response: mild improvements to Files, slow rollout of ‘lite’ versions of FCP and Logic.
Nothing strikes me as particularly pressured. User sentiment of course will always be divided between the die-hard, “don’t complicate my iPad experience” and niche, “give me more tools” creator base.
So that leaves developers? But we all know they have as much sway over Apple as shackled typewriting monkeys.
No, I think the only way Apple moves is the time-honoured reason any company reacts: competition. And that lies entirely in MS/Qualcomm actually delivering a true M1 competitor.
For one - I hope you are wrong - because M$/Qc are not going to be competitive for a long time to come.
second, as for pressure on Apple, I see more and more complaining in forums about “give up already and just give us MacOS on an iPad” and I don’t think it is just a vocal minority. Of course, that is all personal opinion shaped by my own biases. Still, all of the reports of limitations on Final Cut’s iPad Pro version (especially no round-tripping) leave me sad…
Regardless, even I am beginning to think “why am I holding on to that dream?” Especially if M$ WILL DO ITS JOB and deliver on a Surface Pro 11" with Intel/16gb ram/512gb-1tb ssd/5g this fall. It is time for me to give up the iPP11 and go just with Surface Pro 11" plus iPhone 15 Pro Max. Live my Apple life on the iPhone (as my wife does) and shuttle everything else to the SP11…
Thanks Ted - orders from Picard may be just what I needed…
Wth the camera debacle on my Pro X, I had to break out my old Go2. I could only marvel at how perfect its size is and how easy it was to hold and read one-handed. 11" Pro please.
I proclaim thee WinPad and I hereby banish MacPad from the realm.
And if anyone should tell you otherwise…