This is the what everyone that says they want Xcode in an iPad actually means. They don’t want an iPad at all, they want a super portable Mac. Every single complaint around iPadOS is from someone trying to use it like a Mac.
I do wish Apple would make an 11” Mac just so people would stop complaining about the iPad lol.
Audio apps on the iPad show that this isn’t the case. The iPad has an incredible amount of amazing audio apps that simply don’t exist and/or are much cheaper than on other platforms. Some of that is due to the great audio performance from day one but a lot of it can be chalked up to the lack of piracy. There are a seemingly endless number of synths, effects, sequencers, etc. in the App Store. It’s a relative ghost town in the Android world. Both Mac and Windows are better environments for DAW work but the plug ins are uniformly (usually much) more expensive.
The console approach to software distribution is good for developers and in this case leads to better software for consumers.
The iPad's Audio Unit applications unfortunately pale in comparison to even simple desktop plugins. You won't find any Vital or Serum-killers on the App Store, and you definitely won't find software like full-fat Spectrasonics or the U-He instruments. The iPad can do some audio work, but once you stop using it as a digital 8-track or a MIDI machine, you are instantly outclassed by even a $300 Windows laptop running Reaper or Pro Tools.
The iPad excels in performance. Like I said, if you're using a DAW a regular computer is better. The fact remains that audio apps for the iPad are plentiful and cheap. The App Store only approach has made the iPad a more attractive target than Android by a mile. The iPad apps are also screaming deals.
Your comment summarizes the people's inability to appreciate the iPad on its own terms. "You can't run Pro Tools!" is such a silly complaint. Moog, Waldorf, Arturia, Roland, Akai, Eventide, etc etc etc they are all on the App Store and work very well by touch. There are of course a ton of indie apps as well. No, they may not be as "powerful" as some of the ones you mentioned but they are designed to work in a different way than the computer plugins do. And they are priced much much cheaper. Use a computer for computer workflows, use the iPad for things that it does better.
This is a cop-out argument, though. I own an iPad, I know that it handles virtual MIDI and recording fine. So does my smartphone! It does not have world-class plugins for synthesis, recording or even performance if we're being honest with ourselves. Without velocity sensitivity or aftertouch, it's already less expressive than a $200 keyboard.
> Use a computer for computer workflows, use the iPad for things that it does better.
The iPad is a computer. I could be using the iPad for both but Apple won't let me, so now I have another cruddy MIDI controller that doesn't run Bitwig.
I have no idea what your argument is. Sounds like you bought the wrong device. You yourself admit it can use the same input and controllers as a regular computer but it adds a different interface and way of using it. It offers different types of programs with different kinds of interfaces than regular computers do. If the iPad were just a Mac, which if you’re being honest with yourself is what you actually want, then the current programs would not have been made for it. We would be stuck with what we already have. The MacBook Air already exists. If you want to use Bitwig get the right machine.
Again, your inability to appreciate how the iPad is different and offers a different way of working in no way invalidates what has been created. The combination of a touch first interface and console software distribution has created a unique system. Why people want the iPad to be a Mac or an Android tablet is beyond me.
Medical and health. Cook has said multiple times that he thinks that Apple’s greatest legacy will be “health.”
The biggest hurdle in the health hardware game is regulatory. If they can make a noninvasive blood sugar monitor and get it approved they will both print money and help a ton of people.
Aerenhart’s biggest task was combining the online store with the physical. That was my understanding of why she was hired. Before that there were many walls between the two retail arms of online and physical.
Ive was the one behind the 15k watches. He wanted the in store experience to be like a jewelry store. They also brought in his friend that had been doing hi end watches and bands to help with the watch design. Beonce got an 18kt gold link band along with her watch. You can only imagine Ive’s glee at the watches being on the cover of Vogue.
If we limit the definition of pop music to what charts I think it makes all the sense in the world that it is a young person’s game. So much of what drives chart success is what is in fashion at the time. Trend setting will always be the domain of youngsters.
If we expand the definition of pop music to all music that isn’t classical/jazz/experimental, etc. then older, more experienced musicians should be able to do quite well. Frank Sinatra honed his craft over the decades. I think the stuff he did in his 40s and 50s is probably his best.
> So much of what drives chart success is what is in fashion at the time. Trend setting will always be the domain of youngsters.
I would suggest it's more the demands of poverty that make it a young person's game. So, so, so many pop musicians were "I was living in squalor for a decade plus was extremely depressed and was about to hang it up when <thing happened> and we got popular." Huey Lewis, Annie Lennox, ... I can go on and on.
There was a metal artist that was being interviewed about when they were going to tour again and was "Yeah, we'll consider it. But I've got a lot of work at my tattoo business right now." There was another guy that was like "Yeah, had this fame hit in our 20s this would be nice but in our late 30s it isn't really useful. We figured out how to do life by now, and we're not going to disrupt that."
Apple has no idea what the iPad is for but somehow they sell 20 million of them a year...
Apple has been very clear what the iPad is "supposed" to be. It is a touch screen computer. Between its form factor, touch first OS, built in camera, and possible cellular capabilities it can do a lot that a Mac can't do. Something as simple as walking around with it and handing it to someone like a clipboard opens up a million uses in the field that would be much more awkward with a traditional laptop. Artists drawing directly on the surface, musicians playing with touch controls, etc. all take advantage of how the iPad works.
If you insist on using programs and workflows designed for laptop computers the iPad will never make sense to you. I use AUM, Drambo, and a variety of other soft synths and effects on my iPad in conjunction with my analog synths. It's a very different experience than a regular computer.
No software? DaVinci Resolve? Affinity Designer? Final Cut, Procreate, AUM, Logic Pro etc etc etc. As the processors get more powerful more demanding software can be made for it. Running multiple physical modeling AUVs along with FX loops eat up clock cycles. Final Cut Camera on iPhones along with Final Cut on an iPad allow for full multi camera controls and recording from 4 different iPhones with ProRes and log shooting at the same time.
If Apple hadn't continually upgraded the processing power then none of those programs would work. It's up to Apple to make compelling hardware. Better hardware allows more advanced programs. iPads are amazing.
The Procreate UI literally tells us otherwise. When you create a new image, it tells you exactly how many layers it will allow you to have based on the dimensions you set. This number is smaller for older iPads.
Music production with a DAW is better on a computer. Music performance is much better on an iPad. There is a big difference between direct touch controls and using a trackpad. Apps like AUM and AniMoog Z highlight what makes music making on an iPad amazing.
And people here don't want to hear this but the closed nature of the App Store is why audio is so strong on both ios and iPadOS. There are far more music apps for those OSes than Android. In addition to that, many VSTs made for DAWS are available on iPads as AUV at much lower prices than Mac or Windows. The lack of piracy, narrow build targets, and predictably great audio implementation makes it both easier to build and more profitable than other platforms.
And IIRC for the longest time Android had massive latency issues with audio production. Just the whole framework was a bit shit and then you have small variations between manufacturers.
On iOS the basic system was flawless and there is no variance as every single iPad is the same and there's a finite amount of devices devs need to test on.
If you listen to the Woodstock soundtrack it is clear that Hendrix was on a completely different musical level than anyone else in that scene. Ravi Shankar was probably the only person there above him from a chops perspective and possibly in the expressivity department as well. But when it came to sheer inventiveness no one was close to Hendrix. I cannot imagine what it must have been like to see and hear him. It must have felt like an alien was performing.
The Who followed him, and famously destroyed their entire set in a vain attempt to be noticed.
Like a jealous plumber, worried that Kim Kardashian's "Break the Internet" photo series will take away from his appeal, hurriedly posting photos of his plumber's crack online...
I have come around to the idea of guitars being electronic instruments. Strings are the original oscillators. Once they become electrical signals it isn't clear to me how they differ categorically from any other electric instrument. There are an almost infinite number of pedals, many of which offer things like filters, LFOs, and other synthesis stalwarts. You could even make the guitar a controller for more traditional synthesis work.
I do wish Apple would make an 11” Mac just so people would stop complaining about the iPad lol.