iOS 9 and the return of the iPad

For people who own (or are considering purchasing) an iPad, the forthcoming release of iOS 9 is the biggest most exciting event since the iPad was released in 2010.

There’s been a long-standing debate about the iPad. The question is: For those who use a MacBook to get work done, is it practical to replace your MacBook with an iPad? I mean completely replace, as in selling your MacBook and going “all in” with the iPad. For people such as myself, whose work (at least prior to my retirement) consists mainly of writing, the question boils down to: Can the iPad function as one’s primary (maybe even exclusive) writing tool?

For the fortunate few (and I include myself here), the question can seem inconsequential. I own both a MacBook and an iPad. I typically take both with me when I travel. And, at any given moment, I grab whichever device seems best suited to the task at hand. End of story.

But for many others — due to financial constraints or a need to limit one’s travel load or perhaps just for the sake of simplicity — there is a preference to get by with just one of these devices. The question is: Which one?

For most, the answer these days has been trending towards MacBook. There has certainly been a significant decline in iPad sales in the past year, while laptop sales continue to grow. One of the popular proposed explanations for this trend is the success of the iPhone 6 Plus: its larger size can eliminate the need to own both an iPhone and an iPad.

Whatever the explanation, I can tell you this: The iPad has been far from the ideal digital device for serious writing. A MacBook bests an iPad on almost every measure here. True, you can make do with an iPad. But you’ll have to work harder to do so. And, no matter how hard you work, there will still be a significant productivity cost.

If you’ve ever done extensive typing and editing on an iPad, you know what I mean. Using the loupe tool to move the cursor around is a pain. Cut and paste is much more time-consuming and prone to error on an iPad than on a Mac — especially if you are working across applications. Style formatting is more difficult. Simply adding web links can be a major chore. And on and on.

Yes, a few iOS text apps (my favorite is still Textilus) offer features (such as cursor keys and short cut toolbars) that overcome many of the hassles (although there is an irony in touting the advantages of cursor keys, a feature that the Mac largely abandoned when it introduced the mouse). Adding a Bluetooth keyboard to an iPad can similarly be a huge productivity boon. Even so, it’s still more work to do writing work on an iPad than a MacBook.

iOS 9 to the rescue

This is where iOS 9 potentially changes the game — bringing the iPad to near parity with a MacBook. Coming exclusively to iPads are QuickType and Multitasking features that represent the final pieces in a jigsaw puzzle that Apple has been assembling since it first added cut-and-paste to iOS devices years ago.

With Split View (available only in the iPad Air 2 for now), Slide Over and Picture in Picture, you can finally interact with two apps simultaneously. With the new QuickType “trackpad simulator,” you can move the cursor around much like you do on a Mac, eliminating the need for the loupe tool. There’s now a system-wide shortcut toolbar. There’s even a Mac-like app switcher than you can call up with Command-Tab on a Bluetooth keyboard. I’ve tested all these out with the iOS 9 beta and can attest that they work pretty much as advertised.

The jigsaw puzzle metaphor is not perfect; there are still improvements I’d like to see (the ability to drag-and-drop selections across split-screen apps is one obvious example). As with any digital technology, the picture will never be completely finished. But you get the idea. The major pieces are all in place, the refinements are coming.

Originally, I planned to delve into far more detail here as to why these new features are so compelling. However, Federico Viticci has saved me the trouble. I recommend that you read his excellent analysis, which concludes:

“iOS 9 is going to be a watershed moment for iPad users. For many, the iPad is about to graduate from utility to computer.”

These new iOS 9 features are just the software side of the equation. On the hardware side, if the rumor mills are accurate (and I believe they are), a new larger “iPad Pro” will be coming this fall. It should introduce further productivity enhancements. I’ve recently expressed some doubts about the viability of an iPad Pro. But after seeing iOS 9, I’m much more positive. I’ll reserve final judgement until the end of the year, but I’m feeling optimistic.

The bottom line? For those who need a computer to get work done (especially writing work) and have been hoping for a time when the iPad alone could function as that computer without significant compromises, it looks like that time is about to arrive.

Six surprising things I learned at the Apple Store…and one thing that was not a surprise at all

Yesterday, I visited my local Apple Store (4th Street in Berkeley) and got my first hands-on time with the Apple Watch and the 12-inch MacBook. After all I had read about these two new Apple products over the past few weeks, I expected the event to be anti-climatic, confirming conclusions I had drawn from my immersion in the web coverage. Many of my expectations were met. But I was also in for a few surprises:

MacBook

• The look and feel of the new 12-inch MacBook turned out to be much more “drool-worthy” than I had anticipated. It is so thin and so light, it’s hard to believe there’s room for all the required hardware inside. No wonder Apple made it so difficult to open up the case. They don’t want you to see that it’s powered by metachlorians.

Compared to the MacBook Air, the new MacBook is a big step up in almost every way.

In terms of appearance, I much prefer the border-to-border glass to the aluminum rim of the Air. The Air’s case design is unnecessarily wide. The 12-inch MacBook has almost the same width and depth as the 11-inch MacBook Air.

The new MacBook features a Retina display, absent from the Air. And I was comfortable with the resolution of the MacBook, not finding text too small (as some have complained).

Unless saving three or four hundred dollars is critical ($899/$999 vs $1299), I see no reason to prefer a MacBook Air. I especially expect the market for the 11-in Air to fall to near zero over time. The 12-inch MacBook is a much superior piece of hardware — and targets the same market. The MacBook is also a serious competitor for people otherwise considering an iPad Air as their main computer.

The primary downside of the MacBook remains its lone (USB-C) port. This can lead to numerous hassles that will likely require one or more expensive adapters to resolve. Even an initial first step of transferring data from an older Mac can prove to be a challenge, especially if you want speeds faster than Wi-Fi or USB 2.0. Still, I suspect that the target audience for the new MacBook will not be put off by this constraint.

Speaking of USB-C adapters, after looking at Apple’s $79 USB-C Digital AV Multiport Adapter, I started to wonder why the short stretch of cable is needed at all. It seems to just get in the way. Why not have the adapter “clip on” to the MacBook when you plug it into the USB-C port, making it almost like an extension of the laptop? Perhaps a third-party is already working on this type of adapter.

• Based on the online images, I had decided that gold was the color I would get, if I ever got a MacBook. To my surprise, after seeing all the models in the Store, I much preferred Space Gray (joining my friend Dan Frakes in this assessment).

• I knew that typing on the new MacBook’s keyboard would feel different than on other MacBook models. But I wasn’t prepared for how different. I did not like the feel at all. It’s something I might get used to over time, but I doubt I will ever prefer it.

Apple Watch

• I walked into the Apple Store with no prior appointment for trying on an Apple Watch. I expected this would mean I would not get to see one on my wrist that day. Wrong. I was immediately offered a 15-minute session. In fact, the counter displaying Apple Watches was the least crowded spot in the Store. I’m not sure if this is a bad omen or just an outlier.

• I had decided that, if I were to buy a watch, my choice would be the 42mm Space Gray Sport Watch. It looked great online and (at $399) was at the bottom of the price scale. But when I actually got to try one on, I didn’t like the feel of the band and I found its overall appearance underwhelming. Too “sporty” and not “classy” enough for my taste. I wound up much preferring the Milanese Loop. Even at $699, that’s the one I would now get. At least I was correct in assuming that the 42mm model was the right size for me.

• My biggest hesitation about getting an Apple Watch was that it wouldn’t be worth the bother. I’m content taking my iPhone out of my pocket; I don’t need a separate device to save me that effort — especially one that needs charging every night and may not always display the time on demand. However, after playing with the Watch for a while, I began to change my tune. Access to maps, notifications, email, Apple Pay, Siri, and more — all with the flick of my wrist. I could see where I would really enjoy having this device. And the interface worked much more smoothly than I anticipated. The touch screen, the button, the digital crown: I got the hang of combining their actions in no time at all. No amount of advertising can substitute for actually spending time with an Apple Watch. If you have any doubts about the Watch, you owe it to yourself to get over to an Apple Store. Like me, you may be pleasantly surprised. I’m now very close to ordering one.

• One thing I totally expected easily lived up to my expectation: The gold Apple Watch Edition is an exorbitant waste of money. It’s simply a gold-colored Apple Watch. Aside from the color, it has no advantages (if you can call color an advantage). Yes, it’s made of real gold. But if I didn’t know that, I could easily be convinced that it’s merely a gold-tinted alloy. Viewing it from the glass covered display, it didn’t seem special at all. It seemed utterly absurd that the Edition watches cost at least $9000 more than the stainless steel models sitting adjacent to them. I can’t see why anyone would spend the money on an Edition. Even if you could easily afford one, you’d feel better getting 10 or more stainless steel Apple Watches for the same money — and giving away the ones you don’t intend to use.

Putting it together: MacBook, USB-C and the iPad Pro

Apple’s new MacBook made an impressive debut at yesterday’s Apple Media Event. With features such as a 2304 x 1440 Retina display, Force Touch trackpad, and fanless design, it lives up to Apple’s billing as an innovative “reinvention” of a state-of-the-art laptop computer.

Still, despite dropping the Air suffix from its name, the new 12-inch laptop is a very close relative of the Air — both in appearance and target audience. On the other hand, the MacBook is so light (just two pounds) and so thin (24% thinner than an 11-inch MacBook Air) that its truest competitor may turn out to be the iPad Air rather than the MacBook Air.

Reinforcing this iPad matchup, the new MacBook comes in the same assortment of three colors (silver, space gray and gold) as do Apple’s iPads. And (as with all iOS devices and unlike Apple’s other laptops), the new Macbook has no custom configuration options.

USB-C

There’s one more iPad similarity. And it’s a big one: The MacBook has only one port for wired connections (not counting an audio-out jack)! Really. Just one. That’s down from four (2 USB, 1 Thunderbolt, and a power port) in the MacBook Air. The new port even looks like an iOS Lightning port. But it’s not. It’s an entirely new, never-before-seen-on-an-Apple-device port called USB-C. This USB-C connection supports charging, USB 3.1 Gen 1 and DisplayPort 1.2. It does it all, as they say.

My first reaction to this news was: “What? Only one? Even if Apple wanted just one type of port, couldn’t they at least have included two of them?” That way you could charge a MacBook and have an external drive attached at the same time. As it now stands, unless you get an inevitable third-party USB-C hub, you can only do one of these things at a time.

And no Thunderbolt? This means you can’t connect a MacBook to Apple’s Thunderbolt display — an option that had been strongly promoted by Apple just a couple of year’s ago.

I was ready to conclude this whole USB-C thing was a serious misstep on Apple’s part. And it may yet prove to be so. But, more likely, it is Apple once again staying ahead of the curve, pushing the envelope, or whatever similar analogy you prefer. Remember when the iMac first came out, without any floppy drive? People said it was a huge mistake. But it turned out to be prescient. This is Apple doing the same thing.

First, given the target audience for this Mac, which is the low end of the market, the limitations of a lone USB-C port are likely to be less than they may appear. For example, prospective MacBook owners are not the sort to purchase a Thunderbolt Display. That’s more for the MacBook Pro crowd.

More importantly, with the new MacBook, Apple is pushing us towards a world when all connections will be wireless — either to other local wireless devices or over the Internet to the cloud. Want to back up your MacBook? Connect it wirelessly to a Time Capsule. Want a larger display? Use AirPlay to mirror your display to a television. Want to store your super-large music and photo libraries? Use iCloud.

iPad Pro?

Let’s return to the iPad/MacBook similarity. Rumors continue to circulate that Apple will be releasing a 12-inch iPad Pro later this year. Does such a device still make sense, given the arrival of this new MacBook?

Personally, I much prefer an iPad to a laptop for many tasks. There are many times when I find iOS apps and a touchscreen more convenient and more practical than Mac app alternatives and an intrusive physical keyboard. Want to read the New York Times, check the weather, read a Kindle book, play a game, listen to a podcast? The iPad is the better choice. When I am home, I use my iPad Air almost exclusively, while my MacBook Pro gathers dust (I have a desktop Mac for tasks that the Air doesn’t handle well).

The iPad Air also beats even this latest MacBook in terms of weight and size — by a wide margin: the iPad is half the weight and almost half the thickness of the MacBook.

Overall, I don’t see the new MacBook significantly affecting sales of the iPad Air or mini.

A supposed iPad Pro is a different story. An iPad Pro will presumably be targeted for “productivity” tasks that are the traditional domain of laptops — tasks where you typically prefer a physical keyboard. The new MacBook will give an iPad Pro a run for its money here. Even if you could “get by” with just an iPad Pro, a MacBook (with the more powerful and flexible OS X) will be the better choice for getting work done.

Bottom line: Many people will still prefer to own some combination of iOS device(s) and Mac(s). I certainly will. But it’s hard to imagine users opting for both a new MacBook and an iPad Pro. It will be one or the other. And the new MacBook is more likely to be the winner. That’s why I am beginning to have serious doubts about the viability of an iPad Pro. The new MacBook may kill the device before it’s even born.

One final thought: If an iPad Pro is coming…might it come with a USB-C port instead of (or more likely in addition to) a Lightning port? If so, this would allow the Pro to offer an assortment of productivity options not currently possible with existing iPads.

Apple’s hardware announcements: How odd

My reaction to the new hardware announced at today’s Apple media event was hardly a typical one. “How odd” pretty much sums it up. How so?

• Apple introduces the iPad Air 2. The first thing Apple wants you to know about the new iPad Air 2 is that it’s slightly thinner than last year’s model. At some point, increased thinness starts having diminishing returns. For me, we are now at that point. Last year’s Air is already thin enough. So I didn’t get excited by the .05 inches Apple managed to cut off.

Beyond that, the new Air’s dimensions and design are exactly the same as the previous model. Oh, it comes in gold, if that’s of any interest to you.

The new Air has an improved camera (8MP instead of 5MP). However, given that I never take photos with my iPad (I use my iPhone instead), this matters not at all to me.

The new Air has an improved “fused” display, 802.11ac support, a faster processor, TouchID and Apple Pay support. The cellular version also comes with a new Apple SIM that allows you to switch carriers whenever you want without needing to change SIMs. These are welcome additions, and they save the iPad from the doldrums I’ve just described. The end result is that the new iPad emerges as a significant upgrade. It’s not a major overhaul, but you can’t expect Apple to do that every year.

Overall, I don’t see the new iPad as a big enough change to justify upgrading from a prior iPad Air for most people. If you have a pre-Air iPad, or no iPad at all, that’s another story. The upgrade is definitely attractive. Kudos to Apple here.

By itself, we’re not yet in truly “odd” territory, but we’re just getting started.

• Apple announces the not-so-new iPad mini 3. Last year, the only difference in specs between the iPad Air and the iPad mini was the display size. Every other feature was identical. This meant, in deciding which model you preferred, all you had to consider was how big an iPad you wanted. This parity was greeted with unanimous praise by iPad owners.

That’s why it’s odd that Apple abandoned this parity with the new mini. The iPad mini 3 adds TouchID, Apple Pay support and the gold color option. As far as I can tell, that’s it. In every other way, including thinness, it remains the same as last year’s model.

• Apple keeps older models in the lineup. Apple has a history of maintaining older iPhones and iPads when a new model comes out. This allows it to offer lower price point models for those who shop primarily based on cost.

So it wasn’t odd to see Apple do that again this time around. But Apple has gone beyond its usual limits. You can now get last year’s iPad Air, last year’s iPad mini and even the original iPad mini from 2 years ago. This means Apple’s current iPad line-up includes 2 new models and three older ones. And among the two newer ones, only one (the Air) is significantly new. Very odd.

• 16 GB iPads. The storage on the new iPads follows the pattern of the iPhone 6 models: an entry-level 16GB model which bumps up to 64GB for $100 more. I really don’t see why Apple continues to sell the 16GB model. Given that, until this year, Apple has always offered double the storage for each $100 extra, why not start with 32GB? My cynical guess is that Apple expects most people to go for the 64GB model, making more money for Apple than if they had gotten a cheaper 32GB device. Obviously, Apple has not confirmed my speculation. Still, I find it all a bit odd.

[Note: You can compare the specs of all the iPad models here.]

• The Mac mini gets an uninspired upgrade. Apple introduced an entirely new line-up of Mac minis today. While it’s great to see support for Thunderbolt 2 and upgraded processors, this is not the Mac mini I was hoping for.

The top-of-the-line specs for the Mac mini still do not attain the levels available in the iMac. There seems no reason Apple could not do this. But they don’t. The internals of the mini are more like a MacBook than a desktop Mac.

If you were hoping that the Mac mini might evolve into a scaled-down cheaper alternative to the Mac Pro, for people who prefer a “headless” Mac, forget it. As Phil Schiller indicated at the event, Apple views the mini as a very low end model, targeted to first time Mac buyers or to those who want a server for a modest home network.

• Apple introduces the iMac with Retina display. This is the big one I was waiting for: a 27-inch iMac with a Retina display — a 5K display with 4x as many pixels as you get with a 4K television. Whoa!

It starts at $2499. Expensive. But considering what you get with it, that’s quite reasonable. As Apple points out, a comparable stand-alone display could cost $3000 — and that doesn’t include a computer! I expect to buy one in the coming months.

What’s a bit odd here is not the new iMac itself but that it’s the only new or upgraded iMac in the lineup. Apple continues to sell the same 21.5- and 27-inch iMacs from last year. There is no 21.5- or 24-inch Retina display model.

This is similar to what Apple did when it first introduced the MacBook Pro with Retina display. If Apple follows the same pattern here, we can expect to see an “all-Retina” iMac lineup within a year or so. Still, taken together with the new iPad line-up, I can’t recall a time when Apple continued to sell so many versions of older hardware, after new models were announced. Odd.

• No stand-alone Retina 5K display is announced. Apple did not announce a stand-alone 5K Retina display. I have read speculation that this is because current Mac hardware could not drive the display through a Thunderbolt port; it needs the custom direct connection of the iMac. This may be so.

Regardless, this means that Mac Pro users, despite having Apple’s most expensive and powerful machine, cannot get an Apple display that matches what is available with the iMac. Odd. Perhaps it too will come next year.

• Yosemite and iOS 8.1 arrive. Nothing especially new here. Apple had already announced the specs back in June at WWDC and in last month’s iPhone event. Still, it’s good to see that the OS versions are finally live (or will be by next week) — as are Apple Pay and new versions of iWork apps.

Personally, I find the new OS versions much more exciting than the new hardware announced today. I especially look forward to using iCloud Drive and other Continuity features, now that both iOS 8 and OS X Yosemite are out.

• The long view. More than anything else, I’m struck with how, despite the new iPads and iMac announced today, Apple kept older models in its lineups. I’m not sure what this means from a “big picture” perspective, but it certainly suggests that Apple is less motivated to push an out-with-the-old-in-with-the-new marketing approach than it has in the past. When you consider that the remaining iMacs are basically 2012 models, Apple is sticking with “old” for an especially long time.

Perhaps we’ve gotten to a plateau where significant hardware advances don’t happen every year or two anymore. So major new hardware is not possible on an annual or even biannual basis. If so, Apple’s marketing has clearly adjusted to this new reality.

As for the new hardware: the iPad Air 2 is a worthy update; the iMac with Retina display is truly ground-breaking. As for the rest, it still strikes me as odd. Perhaps, in a few days, I’ll shake that feeling. But that’s where I am for now.