←back to thread

380 points rezonant | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
DCKing ◴[] No.40208207[source]
The iPad App Store is perhaps an even more dysfunctional place than the iPhone in how much it holds hardware and use cases hostage to the manufacturer's vision. Just imagine how much more versatile the iPad Pro would be if only you could run Linux VMs on it in the moments you want to do anything remotely tinkery on an iPad.

Apple's hardware since the 2021 iPad Pro (with M1) has had the ability to do this. The iPads have the RAM (16gb on higher storage models), appropriate keyboard and trackpads, the works. Great hardware being held back by Apple's vision people weren't allowed to deviate from.

A straightforward reading of the DMA suggests that Apple is not allowed to restrict apps from using hardware features. Let's hope that means Parallels/VMware style VMs are possible without too much of a fight.

replies(13): >>40208607 #>>40208717 #>>40208974 #>>40209049 #>>40209121 #>>40209184 #>>40209236 #>>40209305 #>>40209387 #>>40209654 #>>40209908 #>>40213422 #>>40232256 #
BillyTheKing ◴[] No.40208607[source]
totally agree - the iPad Pro could be a great second coding/programming tool - I'd love to justify buying myself one, but.. I just don't see a use-case if I can't work on it. I don't design stuff, don't really feel like I need a separate browsing device either
replies(5): >>40208738 #>>40209098 #>>40209920 #>>40209956 #>>40210193 #
dainiusse ◴[] No.40208738[source]
Yep, I've got one and don't use too much. Too big for scrolling, too limited (software) for work. But Apple knows iPad might cannibalize mac and limit it's uses on purpose
replies(3): >>40209047 #>>40209889 #>>40210242 #
whywhywhywhy ◴[] No.40209889[source]
> But Apple knows iPad might cannibalize mac and limit it's uses on purpose

Felt the goal was to overtake Mac during the 2015-2019 era, all the real engineering focus was on iPad, the Macs were underpowered and not really fit for purpose.

Why would Apple choose a platform where they don't get 30% of every Creative Cloud sub when they could have had that.

Only reason they backtracked was because Mac sales didn't fall off and the iPad just isn't that good to do real work on.

replies(3): >>40210055 #>>40210152 #>>40228777 #
rickdeckard ◴[] No.40210152[source]
I believe it's simply more lucrative to keep selling both devices to the same target group, than try to solve the users' problem with a single device.

Everything in Apple is designed to silo off the two product groups.

An "iPad with MacOS" would just shift revenue from the MacOS division to the iPad division, losing a MacOS customer and probably NOT gaining a iPad customer (as he would have purchased an iPad anyway).

Just as much as developing an MacBook convertible is not an issue of user experience but an issue of unnecessary cannibalization of iPad sales...

replies(2): >>40210271 #>>40213188 #
latexr ◴[] No.40210271[source]
By that logic, the iPhone wouldn’t have been able to play music as soon as it launched. Yet that was part of the whole pitch: “an iPod, a phone, and an internet communicator”.
replies(3): >>40210530 #>>40210783 #>>40210793 #
rickdeckard ◴[] No.40210793{6}[source]
And then the iPod died.
replies(2): >>40211189 #>>40228721 #
1. latexr ◴[] No.40211189{7}[source]
Yes, exactly, that’s the point. Apple did it to themselves. They didn’t “silo off the two product groups”.
replies(1): >>40212111 #
2. rickdeckard ◴[] No.40212111[source]
Then either your point is the same as the one I made, or I don't get your point.