Interesting. If they'll come with a cutdown version of the os like the iPads, it'll limit the target audience and the success of the device. On the other hand if it'll be powered by a fully fledged MacOS it'll make it more arbitrary the decision not to have the same features on iPads.
I think that ship has sailed. They already make iPads (the pro line) with M-class processors just like the laptops that run full-featured macOS. This change is to add laptops that run A-class processors like run the iPhone. If all Apple cared about with regards to what capabilities they expose in an OS was what processor was in a device then the iPad Pros would be able to run macOS, but they don’t view their products that way.
> If all Apple cared about with regards to what capabilities they expose in an OS was what processor was in a device then the iPad Pros would be able to run macOS
That's my point, and I think this hybrid Mac with iPhone chip will make this even more blatant. You are effectively paying more for less features just because they know what's best for you.
I already have an M3-powered iPad Air; Apple currently produces iPad hardware that could, theoretically, run full MacOS. The decision is already about as arbitrary as it gets.
> StikDebug works around those restrictions by using a local VPN profile to manage the JIT process securely within the app. Once you approve the VPN configuration, StikDebug can communicate with sideloaded apps and activate JIT automatically when you launch them. This means that users on iOS 26 can finally enjoy the same performance benefits that developers used to unlock only through Xcode or jailbreaking.
And Apple doesn't really want to anyway, they get to profit from both side this way.
The iPad could be a fantastic machine but as is, it makes no sense for most workflow. It seems to be stuck at being a fancy notepad or expensive drawing tablet for hip artists (real pros use the much larger and more convenient Wacoms anyway).
Why? There are already iPads and iPhones more expensive that Macs and Apple is not trying to justify anything. The capabilities of the OS have nothing to do with the chip of course.
If you think this is worth the investment in the ecosystem go for it. It just makes me quite sceptical to touch anything apple. I don't think they have their customers best interest in mind, and it shows time and again. Not a big fan of this paternalistic approach to product design, but this is just me.
To be fair the paternalistic approach has really increased recently and I actually think it's mostly about greed in the end.
They want to control not just because they think they know better, but because this is how they get to maximise their profits.
In any case, it has been harder and harder to advocate for any Apple products over the years.
Funnily enough, once you are outside the marketing hype, you realised that most of their products are not very competitive for their price.
I think they are trying to milk the silicon while they can because it is really the only As up their sleeve currently. When that advantage is gone, they will be in trouble and they know it.
Go for what? I would just find it surprising if they release a laptop which is running anything but Mac OS. You can already get an iPad with a keyboard and a touchpad anyway...
> have their customers best interest in mind, and it shows time and again.
Of course, neither does Dell, Lenovo or HP. Or especially Google for that matter (at least in that case Apple's and their customers interests somewhat align since they aren't making money by selling their data to third parties).
Sorry, I should have said if it makes sense for people they should go for it, I just find it weird to cripple devices like that just for the sake of market segmentation.
