iPad, Pro?
Analysing the iPad Pro Debate
Following every iPad Pro announcement, there is always a flurry of commentary and debate regarding whether it is now finally a “pro device” or “laptop replacement”, or similar. However, this year’s iPad Pro seemed to spark a livelier discussion than usual — most likely due to Apple’s grandiose claims regarding its performance and versatility, the significant portion of keynote time dedicated to specs, and their constant comparisons to “computers”¹:
- With the new iPad Pro, you get what you need from a computer. It’s more powerful than most computers. And more portable than all of them.
- Completely redesigned and packed with our most advanced technology, it will make you rethink what iPad is capable of. And what a computer is capable of.
- The new all-screen design means iPad Pro is a magical piece of glass that does everything you need, any way you hold it.
- A12X Bionic also makes iPad Pro faster than most PC laptops and powerful enough to handle the apps you use every day. And even pro apps like Adobe Photoshop CC.
- iPad Pro does what a computer does, but in more intuitive ways. It works like a computer. And in ways most computers can’t.
- ⌘ Use familiar keyboard shortcuts.
- A high-performance computer deserves a high-performance connector. USB-C gives you a high-performance connection to accessories like an external display or camera.
- Each app in the App Store is designed to take full advantage of the power and large display of iPad Pro.
- It has a place for your files, and a way to get to them from all your devices.
- It’s faster than 92% of all portable PCs. The iPad Pro delivers Xbox One S-class graphics performance in a package that is much smaller.
- It’s not only the most popular tablet, but the most popular computer in the world.
I feel there has been a lack of nuance in the ensuing debate; thus, I will analyse the six most common arguments I have encountered.
1. Techies/tech reviewers are out of touch with how other people are really using iPads — they use them as computer replacements; therefore, they are.
Nobody is denying that people are using tablets instead of desktops or laptops. However, people have also replaced their computers with smartphones — it doesn’t make them computer replacement devices. To me, that’s akin to when notebooks were able to become “desktop replacements”:
A desktop replacement computer (DTR) is a personal computer that provides the full capabilities of a desktop computer while remaining mobile.
2. Sustained laptop sales and people’s preference of laptop UX (e.g. mouse) are due to clinging to “old paradigms”.
iPad’s twin sibling, iPhone, upended people’s expectations of smartphones & mobile phones, and permanently altered paradigms. Contrary to the iPad, however, smartphones haven’t suffered from this apparent problem. iPad has been around for almost a decade (it’s certainly past the Early Adopter stage), yet people are still having the same debate — presumably because it doesn’t meet everyone’s computing needs yet.
It’s noteworthy that in the same event, Apple also unveiled their revamped MacBook Air due to public pressure. If iPad offered a superior computing experience across the board, as iPad proponents and Apple keep insisting, people would have abandoned laptops in favour of iPads forthwith, and this debate would have already been put to rest. As it stands, iPad proponents are levelling what amounts to “you’re using it wrong” at the over 100 million laptop buyers who simply find an iPad still unsuitable for their workflow and use cases.
3. The only people who are unable to use an iPad Pro (for their daily computing needs) amounts to a segment of niche professionals, such as software developers and creatives.
This argument usually follows from the above. The continuation of this argument is that non-niche, non-creative professionals are happily using iPad:
However, “pros” using the Salesforce app are likely using (or only need) the non-Pro iPad for these tasks already — or even simply an iPhone (as evidenced with the cannibalising of iPad mini). Thus, the iPad Pro is overkill and immaterial to such pros. Accordingly, it calls for different evaluation criteria — i.e. from the perspective of “niche” professionals. Further, Apple is often highlighting those supposedly “niche edge use cases” on stage and in their marketing materials.
It is noteworthy that within the Apple community, Android phones with excessive specs were often criticised for being unnecessary.
4. iPad Pro is the future, thus should be (re)viewed accordingly.
It goes without saying that a consumer typically does not buy something now, holding out hope that it will meet their needs in the future, yet this is precisely what some are suggesting to do:
Similarly, I am perplexed at the incessant ridicule of tech reviewers for simply doing their job of pointing out shortcomings from the perspective of the widest possible range of users. If Apple had disclosed what iPad features iOS 13, 14, or 15 will contain, then perhaps the criticism is merited; however, this is obviously not the case, and I certainly can’t see how any reasonable person would view it as some form of anti-Apple bias. Rather, it detracts from the discourse and tires all parties involved.
Does that mean reviewers or critics (such as myself) think traditional computers will be around forever? Absolutely not!
Does that bother me? No!
I’m simply saying that people’s reasoning behind their preferences should be carefully examined (be it in usability, ergonomics, UX, or otherwise) and not simply dismissed as the grumblings of tech laggards.
5. Old paradigms need to die.
As has been observed by others, tech pundits seem to be obsessed with stuff killing other stuff — most recently, it was all the “iPhone Killer” phones; now it’s about burying and cremating anything relating to laptops. However, time and again, history has proven otherwise. Rather than products or technologies dying, subsequent products “transume” — transcend and subsume — preceding paradigms and products. Apple’s most famous example is the iPhone transuming the iPod. In terms of input methods, the most likely scenario is that the future of input methods is all of them — indeed, we currently use a variety of input methods, depending on the task: voice, software keyboard, hardware keyboard, multitouch, stylus, mouse. Soon eye tracking and cognitive computing will become mainstream, and they will be added to our arsenal of human-computer interfaces.
6. People are only resistant to iPad Pro due to lack of USB storage/mouse support/flaky digital camera support.
Focusing on these specific missing features overlooks what I believe is a bigger problem: iOS’ inherent shortcomings on iPad—
- increased unreliability
- repeatedly-changing, confusing multitasking UX
- fiddly touch UX (e.g. remapping of tap+hold action)
- mobile-class browser, with woefully inadequate file download support
- poor image import performance
- inability to change default apps
- unreliable cloud services
- same Springboard-centric UI from 2010.
In isolation, many of these may seem trivial; however, they can serve to complicate a once-simple task, defeating the very reason one buys an iPad: for its relative simplicity and ease of use.
It is noteworthy that iPad evangelists downplay the importance of digital camera importing and external USB storage. However, this directly contradicts Apple’s own radical move of abandoning their long-favoured proprietary connector strategy — not to mention their repeated emphasis of how USB-C elevates the iPad Pro to parity with laptops, and how it “can connect to data accessories and cameras at the same time”. Once again, Apple is who set people’s expectations here!
Conclusion
iPad proponents have understandably confused any critique of the iPad Pro and its OS with the common refrain from years ago: “You can’t use an iPad for real work” — after all, iPads could obviously be used for real work, even prior to the Pro! The mantra was largely unjustified and rightly mocked. However, not all criticisms are created equally, and to dismiss scepticism simply because it seems similar to previous incorrect views, or because it doesn’t align with one’s own experiences is shortsighted.
You may argue that ultimately my quibble is with the iPad Pro’s price, but that its superior specs compared to similarly-priced laptops means it is justified. However, Chromebooks with impressive specs (and prices to match) have not been widely adopted². Why? The software simply doesn’t justify it!
Apple fans have always said specs don’t matter; only user experience does. The iPad Pro is no different:
At this point you might be asking, “Well, what do you want from the iPad Pro?” I want to see it fully utilise its raw hardware power by matching it with an equally powerful OS. Unfortunately, I simply don’t see that yet. And the only way it will happen is through us pushing Apple to do better.
¹ nilay patel noted that Apple conveniently categorises the iPad Pro as a “mobile device” when it tops mobile device benchmarks, but switches to saying it’s faster than a PC when it beats out traditional computers. “What’s a computer” indeed.
² Apple is unlikely to have this issue, since they could release anything and it would sell by the bucketful; that does not mean it is providing users with the best experience they can provide.
You can follow me on Twitter:
