3 ms·

None of the suggestions in the post would increase the complexity. I like the way Apple redesigned the home screen experience this year: a LOT more features, b

by flixic 6y ago

None of the suggestions in the post would increase the complexity. I like the way Apple redesigned the home screen experience this year: a LOT more features, but all are gradually discovered. App Library discovered when you "hide" an app. Togglable pages discovered when you tap on dots in wiggle mode. Widgets discovered via + in wiggle mode. Many people won't know about any of this, and that's fine. Same with Pro apps and plugins, or side-loading. Gradually discovered complexity, and only if you need[0]. The post does not argue for introducing a Finder and a file system, or overlapping windows. [0] - one possible downside would be if for App Store rules reasons some major apps would go for side-loading. Even if only Netflix decided to move away from the App Store and educate customers how to install via side-loading, it would suck for most people AND Apple. Probably the main reason why Apple will do anything in it's power to never allow this to happen.

tgv 6y ago
Certainly the "side loading" option would increase complexity, or it would make a large group of iPad users load applications, mess up their iPad or expose their data, and then complain to Apple. The iPad's strength is that it's hard to break its functionality.
- mantap 6y ago
  We on this forum complain to Apple on a daily basis. Nothing ever happens. I don't see evidence that Apple's decision making is affected by what their users think. It took them three years to fix the keyboards even when they were objectively broken. Apple doesn't want side loading because it would mess up their revenue stream. Not because they care about their customers. Look at the lengths they are going to avoid USB-C on the iPhone, a technology they pioneered, just to protect their revenue stream.
  - tgv 6y ago
    True, but the safety/stability is (IMO) a great selling point. Not for the people here, but for the non-technical crowd it's definitely a plus.
janfoeh 6y ago
> None of the suggestions in the post would increase the complexity. Apart from maybe sideloading, I agree with you. It's not the list of suggestions I disagree with, it's the fundamental assumption of the article that iPads can and should become pro devices. The needs of power users and non-power users are at odds with each other most of the time - so far, so obvious. Improving a product for one group usually comes at the expense of the other - this is pretty visible in iPadOS already, which arguably has become a lot more intimidating and less user friendly than, say, iOS 6. I believe that trying to bridge that divide is ultimately futile, at least for the foreseeable future and barring some major breakthrough in human computing interfaces. Apple should once and for all position iPads as a non-pro machines, to free iPadOS from these contradicting expectations and requirements. Beefing it up in ways the article suggests only deepens the problem. In that light, I would consider the iPad Pro line to be a strategic mistake. A "pro" tablet line should either have come with macOS, or not exist at all. I'm not even sure it should have been called iPad.

by flixic 6y ago

tgv 6y ago

Certainly the "side loading" option would increase complexity, or it would make a large group of iPad users load applications, mess up their iPad or expose their data, and then complain to Apple. The iPad's strength is that it's hard to break its functionality.

mantap 6y ago
We on this forum complain to Apple on a daily basis. Nothing ever happens. I don't see evidence that Apple's decision making is affected by what their users think. It took them three years to fix the keyboards even when they were objectively broken. Apple doesn't want side loading because it would mess up their revenue stream. Not because they care about their customers. Look at the lengths they are going to avoid USB-C on the iPhone, a technology they pioneered, just to protect their revenue stream.
- tgv 6y ago
  True, but the safety/stability is (IMO) a great selling point. Not for the people here, but for the non-technical crowd it's definitely a plus.

janfoeh 6y ago

> None of the suggestions in the post would increase the complexity. Apart from maybe sideloading, I agree with you. It's not the list of suggestions I disagree with, it's the fundamental assumption of the article that iPads can and should become pro devices. The needs of power users and non-power users are at odds with each other most of the time - so far, so obvious. Improving a product for one group usually comes at the expense of the other - this is pretty visible in iPadOS already, which arguably has become a lot more intimidating and less user friendly than, say, iOS 6. I believe that trying to bridge that divide is ultimately futile, at least for the foreseeable future and barring some major breakthrough in human computing interfaces. Apple should once and for all position iPads as a non-pro machines, to free iPadOS from these contradicting expectations and requirements. Beefing it up in ways the article suggests only deepens the problem. In that light, I would consider the iPad Pro line to be a strategic mistake. A "pro" tablet line should either have come with macOS, or not exist at all. I'm not even sure it should have been called iPad.