Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Nov 2015 13:53 UTC

The reviews for the Apple Surface are coming in. There's two reviews at The Verge, one at the Wall Street Journal, and John Gruber's got early access from Apple as well.

The general gist? If you've ever read a Surface Pro review, you've read all the iPad Pro reviews. Well, mostly - the complaints leveled at the Surface Pro are being tip-toed around a bit now that they apply to an Apple product, of course, and suddenly, the magic argument "but it will get better in the future" is now completely valid, while the same argument is never considered valid for the Surface Pro (or something like the Priv and its early bugs).

That being said, all reviews dive into just how uncomfortable the iPad Pro is to use as a laptop - and the problem, of course, is iOS itself. iOS is a mobile, touch-first operating system that Apple is now trying to shoehorn into a laptop role. iOS provides no support for mice or trackpads, and the keyboard and iOS lack most basic shortcut keys, so in order to do anything other than typing, you'll need to lift your arm and reach for the screen to use touch. This is something Apple has mocked for years as the reason not to include touch on laptops, and now they release a device which requires it 100%.

This is what happens when you run out of ideas and try to shoehorn your cashcow - iOS - into a role it was never intended to fulfill, without being gutsy enough to make the changes it requires. The iPad Pro is clearly screaming for a touchpad (and proper keyboard shortcuts), but it doesn't have any, and according to John Gruber, it never will (a comment I filed away for later when Apple inevitably adds mouse support to iOS).

Microsoft's Surface may not be perfect, but its problems stem almost exclusively not from a lack in hardware capability or a faulty concept, but from Microsoft's Metro environment being utterly shit. The concept of having a tablet and a laptop in the same device, seamlessly switching between a tablet UI and a desktop UI, is sound - the only problem is that Microsoft doesn't have a working tablet UI and applications. Meanwhile, trying to shoehorn a mobile, touch-first UI into a laptop form factor is just as silly and idiotic as trying to shoehorn a desktop UI into a mobile, touch-first form factor - and Apple should know better.

Or should they? Paul Thurrott, earlier this week:

While the iPad Pro was in many ways inevitable, it also points to a crisis of original thought at Apple, which has been coasting on the iPhone’s coattails for perhaps too long. At Apple, the solution to every problem is another iPhone. And the iPad Pro, like the new Apple TV and the Apple Watch, is really just another attempt to duplicate that singular success in other markets.

Thurrott really hits the nail on the head. The iPhone became a success because Apple sought - and succeeded in - designing an interface and interaction model that was specifically designed for the iPhone's input methods - the multitouch display, the home button. Ever since that major big hit, they've been trying to shoehorn that exact same interface and interaction model into every major new product - the Apple Watch, the new Apple TV, and now the iPad Pro. However, if there's one thing we've learned from Palm OS (pen-first, mobile-first) and iOS (multitouch-first, mobile-first), it's that every form factor needs a tailored interaction model - not a shoehorned one.

When you're a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - which sums up Apple's new major product lines ever since the release of the iPhone, and the iPad Pro seems no different. It will do great as an iPad+, but beyond that? It's not going to make a single, meaningful dent, without considerable restructuring of iOS' UI and interaction models - and lots and lots of crow.

Permalink for comment 620676
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Some alternative views
by winter skies on Wed 11th Nov 2015 18:27 UTC in reply to "Some alternative views"
winter skies
Member since:

Benedict Evans also has an interesting article on the broader context entitled "Mobile, ecosystems and the death of PCs" here

The entire article is worth read (his stuff always is) but for the impatient here are his conclusions:

"First, iOS and Android are a step change in ease of use over Windows and MacOS. Microsoft has arguably matched this on phones, but on 'PCs' all the complexity to support the old way of doing things has to stay - including things like supporting interchangeable hardware. If you like tinkering with your computer this step change is bad (just as the move from command lines to GUIs was), but it enables far more people to use these things.

Second, iOS, ChromeOS and (debatably) Android have a fundamentally better security model. This comes with reduced openness, but now that the threat is not a floppy with a virus-infected copy of Leisure Suit Larry but 500 people in a foreign country hacking your Financial Controller's assistant's child's preschool to send spear-phishing emails, that's a much more valuable tradeoff.



The "death of PCs" is a really tiresome argument.
I disagree with points 1 and 2.

1. "it enables far more people to use these things."
BUT it does discourage people from understanding how things work, and it increasingly promotes the idea that a computing device is a magic box which converts input into output in some mysterious ways noone but its creators should be concerned with. I think that is ultimately an impoverishment for our minds.

2. I'm having a hard time trying to follow the chain of Saxon genitives up to the starting point, but oh-it-involves-children, so that the argument can't be answered back without looking like cynical bastards. I see this trend as trading freedom for a false sense of security. Hardly the first time we're doing so anyway.

As for point 4, that's stating the obvious. But for how many years is the ARM/iOS/Android ecosystem going to keep this pace? I think we're progressing towards saturation. And then? I wish those Sybils would try to dive into less obvious things.

I love PCs because they are imperfect, run into hiccups, but let you do almost everything you want. I grew up with this openness in mind (e.g. installing GNU/Linux, FreeBSD and NetBSD on everything I had on hand, including a PowerBook G4 and a Sun Ultra 5, just for the sake of it - nothing special, but nice!), and I'm not prepared to give it up "because mobile".
"Mobile" as a tightly controlled environment where software and hardware are inextricably bound and the boundaries of what you can do have been defined from the start by the vendor has nothing to do with empowering people and everything to do with giving back control to corporations.
I am frankly fed up with analysts pushing this "new world" as the best thing ever happened to computing.

Yeah, anyway, all I care about is Apple keeping OS X alive without turning it into a kindergarten-ready iOS clone - or some high-end CAD and archviz software being ported to Linux, but that's less likely, alas. I wonder what software is used to create the graphics in those nice Andreessen Horowitz slides. Excel+Powerpoint on an iPad? Aligning stuff with fingers?

Edited 2015-11-11 18:29 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6