Conceptually Apple has to create the illusion that these devices are dissimilar enough to justify shelling out thousands for both. But at the end of the day (i

Conceptually Apple has to create the illusion that these devices are dissimilar enough to justify shelling out thousands for both. But at the end of the day (in my experience), users fall into one of two buckets- primary use case is productivity (coding, office, photo/movie editing, etc.) or primary use case is consuming content. While there is some overlap between the two users as evidenced by the fact that many people own both and do some of both on each device, it seems inevitable that the devices will continue to converge until a $900 iPad is fully capable of doing 95% of what a $2000 MBP can do and then Apple will have a real problem on its hands as people stop buying the more expensive devices and the cheaper ones last much longer. We are watching the innovator’s dilemma play out inside a single company. Interestingly one of the tell tale signs a disruption is underway is a hybrid use case where people use a costlier version of a product along side a cheaper version because the cheaper version does certain things better than the costly one.