Jason Snell, writing for Macworld:
Look out to 2025 and imagine a futuristic computing device made from Apple that’s larger than a phone, filling the ecosystem that currently is filled by laptops and iPads (and maybe even desktop Macs). This is a thin, light device, with battery life and sensors and other features that we can only dream about today.
And:
Apple seems to see the Mac as a rock-solid platform for laptop and desktop computers that people depend on to do their jobs. The Mac is, in many ways, defined by the fact that it’s a keyboard-and-trackpad-driven system with a windowed user interface. If you take that away and simplify the Mac, you might be able to get to something a bit closer to the iPad–but you risk losing some of the key attributes that make the Mac what it is.
And:
The iPad, on the other hand, seems not too far away from that 2025 device already. What’s required is an evolution of the very simple touch interface pioneered by the iPhone in order to provide the tools that sophisticated and demanding users need to get their jobs done. With the addition of iCloud Drive and support for other cloud services, Apple basically gave the iPad a browsable file hierarchy.
For the iPad to get there, however, Apple will need to up its game when it comes to growing iOS. After all, 2025 is only eight years away; a new iPad feature or two every other year between now and then won’t get it done. iOS needs better peripheral support, more sophisticated windowing and multitasking, improvements to file handling, better support for application and system automation, and a whole lot more. But if Apple puts the work in, the iPad could be that device in 2025–and still clearly be recognizable to a visitor from 2017 as an iPad.
Is the iPad the future? Will we continue to live in a hybrid world, with the Mac on the desk, the iPhone in pocket, and the iPad the larger portable device in between? Or will the iPad evolve into a device capable of filling its current slot as well as replacing the need for the Mac?
Interesting questions. Clearly, the answers will depend on the technology that comes our way over time. Will we see power sipping flexible screens that can fit into our pockets and unfold into large screens as needed? Will battery life become indefinite? Will quantum computing significantly raise the performance bar? Will gesture detection become sophisticated enough that our computers will allow us to type even if our hands are in our pockets?
If the answer to those questions are true, the computing devices of the future might bear little resemblance to what we have now. Though I’d bet that the Apple brand will still be just as strong.
Already thin enough, light enough and battery life capable.
In order to work, you need real multitasking and an exposed file system. You need a better window management system. You need real processing power with significant multithreading.
“Will we continue to live in a hybrid world, with the Mac on the desk, the iPhone in pocket, and the iPad the larger portable device in between?”
All this angst about the future of computing is seriously misplaced.
For 60+ years, computing tasks have migrated to the smallest, least expensive device capable of doing the job. At the same time, we have continuously found new ways to use computers that demand more and more computing power.
While the smallest and most affordable computer has constantly shrunk, larger, more powerful computers have not gone away, they’ve merely been re-tasked with different, harder work. Corporate accounting nowadays can be done on a PC instead of on a mainframe, but mainframes still exist (we call them supercomputers now).
Getting on the internet is the computing task that everyone wants to do. It drove the boom in PC sales for 15 years. Now that task can be accomplished with a phone or (if you need a bigger screen) a tablet. People who don’t need to do any computing tasks beyond getting on the internet don’t need a PC anymore. And with the steep decline in PC sales comes angst and panic about the future of the Mac.
Cheap $300 computers at walmart? Those are the machines that are going away. Powerful computers that can do 3d rendering, video editing and transcoding, and similar high end tasks? Those computers continue to have a bright future. Computers with big screens and physical keyboards and pointing devices aren’t going anywhere either — because some tasks don’t need a lot of CPU grunt but they do require more than a touch screen can provide. And thus, macs aren’t going anywhere. Apple is well positioned to continue to serve the part of the PC market that isn’t going away. In fact I suspect they will continue to gain market share.
And Apple is also well positioned to serve the computing needs of everyone else in the world as well. The fact that they will be selling far more tablets and phones than they will ever sell PCs is not something to be worried by, it’s a strength.
https://youtu.be/hb4AzF6wEoc 30 years ago. It’s amazing how far we’ve come. 8 years is a long time in an accelerating world.
Some interesting stats on mainframes (specifically Cobol based) from 2009 time frame:
Yea, I know.
iPads are the future. So are smart phones. So are laptops. So are big iron services. So are micro services.
iPads fit a really nice eco-system of connected systems, all with different capabilities. The future isn’t a single device to support all your needs. The future is connected devices and services each with different strengths and weaknesses. But taken as a whole, they create a lot of value for the user.
I think what specifically differentiates the desktop Mac from the iPad are the input peripherals. The keyboard and mouse are a super-strong combo that are hard to abandon when doing seriously intricate work.
For 2025, I would think beyond what exists to what doesn’t, something on par with Google Glass. Input will still be very important, but will that be a bluetooth keyboard & mouse or something else? For mobile applications, these are no longer adequate. In Dan Brown’s Digital Fortress, he describes some called a Monocle
Excerpt From: Dan Brown. “Digital Fortress.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/y4DRw.l
Maybe this is a viable direction, but I’m not enthusiastic about learning shorthand.
Not talking OSes here, talking size of hardware. The business class mainframes you mention run on blade sized servers nowadays. Mainframes, in the sense of “a multimillion dollar computer that fills a whole room” no longer get tasked with mere business computing anymore, but they still get made and still have lots of work that can’t be done on anything less powerful.
Oh absolutely. I wasn’t arguing with you. You make a lot of good points.
I think iPad sales will languish because it has to compete against the iPhone. As I’ve said before, though, I don’t see any technical reason that the Phone.app can’t be put on the 4G iPads. I don’t especially like my iPhone. I prefer the iPad’s larger screen for pretty much everything. I have an iPhone because it’s got the one critical function. Put it on an iPad, and yes Apple will lose that iPhone sale. But I’ll buy a higher end iPad. And if they’re serious about the iPad being the future, they’ll have increased the chance it will really become that future. As things stand now, as sales go down, they dedicate less resources to it, and they don’t work as hard to pump exciting new ideas into the iPads (and when they do, it’s after the iPhones). This will lead to a spiral. Not everybody wants an iPad with phone capability. But a lot of people will.
iPads are great for what they are used for, and they dominate many task-specific niches. However, there isn’t a beyond-infinite, trees-growing-to-the-sky demand for them, and due to their good design and heavier components [1] they last a long time – much longer than phones. Apple either has to accept a non-expanding product line or terminate; there won’t be a magical way back to the initial growth rate.
[1] Plus most are kept in cases, and for task applications those are often heavy cases.
https://apps.kaonadn.net/4882011/product.html#10/1016;44
A 7-foot tall, water-cooled blade to be sure.
Here’s a link to the info page in case you don’t want to click that link (it is where you end up from the Virtual Tour link on the IBM page):
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/hardware/zenterprise/zec12.html
I disagree. Those are not the hold ups at all. If you want ‘real multitasking’ and you just have to be able to play with your file system, get a dang computer and enjoy.
the real issues with the iPad is that the UI for iOS hasn’t been adjusted to take advantage of the larger screen and the apps haven’t been given more range for power. I mean we have high schools giving kids iPads to do their school work and Pages for iOS doesn’t support Math Type or EndNote, both of which are handy AF if not required for students. It can’t be that hard to add them. That’s the kind of stuff holding up the game. Not that you can’t move around files
Eventually I think the “phone” will be in your watch. Use your AirPods and your 4G Apple Watch to make calls and wifi tether your iPad to the watch for connectivity as you need it. It’s easier and more convenient to have a watch on your wrist instead of a phone always in your pocket.
Makes sense to me anyway.
That just shifts the issue though. If they can put telephony on the watch, there’s no reason they can’t put it on the iPad. And it’s still a matter of “Why do I have to buy that second device?” I have a hard time reconciling Tim Cook’s “the iPad is the future of computing” and Apple hobbling iPad functionality. They’re sacrificing the long view for the sake of the short view.
Let me try to clear up what I meant.
I don’t think Apple views the future of the iPad or the future of computing as having anything to do with making phone calls.
I also think if Apple moves the telephone to another device it will be to the watch.
I don’t think they view not making telephone calls as hobbling the functionality of the iPad.
There isn’t a “beyond-infinite” demand for anything, including the iPhone, but thanks for framing the issue in such a reasonable fashion.
I suspect you’re exactly right about Apple’s view of things. However, telephony is the one true necessity. So people’s mindset is generally that they must buy a phone. And then they decide if they want an iPad as well, as an additional expense. Too often, even people who love their iPads opt not to upgrade because the threshold of “need” doesn’t seem great enough. But how many of those same people upgrade their phones regularly using a lower threshold of need? Pretty much everyone in my office, at any rate, and I doubt they’re outliers. They have limited funds, so they’ll get the iPhone because they can convince themselves it’s a necessity, but they can’t convince themselves the same about the iPad, even though most of them use their iPads in preference whenever they have the opportunity. The point being that telephony might not be essential to the functionality of the iPad, but it’s boxed the iPad out of certain sales. And the less it sells, the less priority Apple puts into updates (as we’ve seen with Macs and with iPads). It feels very much like when MS used to hobble products for fear of competing with Windows. It’s a very short-sighted view.