Watched a video questioning whether MacOS is suitable for iPad.
Watched a video questioning whether MacOS is suitable for iPad.
Here we begin with some user feedback on the MAC address video. I focused on a few points that caught my attention. First, iPad OS offers superior touch support and is designed specifically for it, unlike macOS. Still, there are limitations—such as the file system shown in the video—which works better on macOS. External display problems were also mentioned, a common issue across Apple products. On the positive side, external device compatibility exists. When discussing iPad use in a color room, it was noted that many specialized tools like Blackmagic devices were removed. This raised concerns since those products are tailored for color correction. The problem lies in the lack of native support for such hardware on iPad OS. Regarding MacOS on iPad, it’s true that the operating system doesn’t accommodate many peripherals, and only apps built for them function properly. This isn’t a problem with MacOS itself, as drivers and programs can still interface with compatible devices. If Apple were to switch to MacOS on iPad, it would enable true touchscreen support across all devices. This idea aligns with Alex’s vision for more intuitive Mac experiences. Overall, these observations highlight both strengths and areas for improvement.
appl ei think can detect the internals of the system probably only letting it run an m1 device, so maybe the m1 iPad, but for things like display issue there is an app called duet where yoiu can use a second device as a monitor, idk if that helps but iv used a Chromebook as a second monitor with it
The system remains consistent with macOS, focusing mainly on the file browser which requires significant adjustments. If macOS were installed on an iPad, it would essentially mirror the same challenges. The current Finder experience on macOS is problematic for touch interactions, making it nearly impossible to navigate without accidentally moving files. Instead of complex solutions, developers would likely stick to the iPadOS file manager, leveraging existing code that works on macOS.
This situation stems from a driver framework that shares similar APIs with macOS, allowing hardware manufacturers to provide drivers for iPad devices. However, unlike major software providers such as Google or Microsoft, they lack the incentive to fully support iPadOS due to its limited market size—most iPads are primarily used for consuming content rather than interactive applications.
Adapting existing apps for touch remains a daunting task, often requiring extensive redesigns and prolonged research. For complex applications, crafting an intuitive touch interface could take years. It’s unlikely that major fixes have been developed over the past decade, as the shift in user expectations and market dynamics has made UX a more pressing concern than technical rewrites.
I don't really rely on either, but the issues you mention could be resolved by just including those capabilities in iOS. If you prefer macOS, a MacBook works fine. For a touchscreen, perhaps a more focused question would be better: "Why doesn't Apple offer touchscreen MacBooks?"
I interpreted those instructions as a shift in perspective regarding the iPad ecosystem. The author believes the Apple Pencil replaced certain controls and diminished the appeal of high-end iPad applications. They argue that focusing on the latest iPad Pro as the sole device overlooks the value of older models running smoothly. The writer emphasizes that performance matters more for everyday use than overhauling existing apps for newer hardware. They also point out that affordable used iPads can offer a superior experience compared to pricier Android alternatives, highlighting the importance of brand reliability and value. Overall, the viewpoint stresses the significance of practical usability over cutting-edge specs.
Many issues can be easily fixed with improved apps from Apple and third-party developers. For instance, a more intuitive file manager tailored for touch interfaces—either by default or with an extended layout—would work well. People often refer to macOS and iPadOS as if they mean the same interface, but they actually describe different user experiences. When linking to an external display and using touch controls, users wish for a desktop-like flexibility rather than the restrictive full-screen feel of a touchscreen-only setup.