Apple's Next Hit Could Be a Microsoft Surface Pro Clone

theodp writes "Good artists copy, great artists steal," Steve Jobs used to say. Having launched a perfectly-timed attack against Samsung and phablets with its iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, Leonid Bershidsky suggests that the next big thing from Apple will be a tablet-laptop a la Microsoft's Surface Pro 3. "Before yesterday's Apple [iPad] event," writes Bershidsky, "rumors were strong of an upcoming giant iPad, to be called iPad Pro or iPad Plus. There were even leaked pictures of a device with a 12.9-inch screen, bigger than the Surface Pro's 12-inch one. It didn't come this time, but it will. I've been expecting a touch-screen Apple laptop for a few years now, and keep being wrong.

Comments

It's the OS, Stupid

[nyctopterus]

To do this, Apple would need a new OS, or do some sort of horrible blend between OS X and iOS. That's not happening. I think there will be a bigger iPad at some point, but it will just run iOS. It won't be a convertible.

Re:It's the OS, Stupid

[Jane Q. Public]

To do this, Apple would need a new OS, or do some sort of horrible blend between OS X and iOS. That's not happening. I think there will be a bigger iPad at some point, but it will just run iOS. It won't be a convertible.

I agree. It doesn't need to be a convertible. Apple already makes perfectly serviceable, compatibly-sized Bluetooth keyboards, as well as mice and touchpads. Hell, I use them sometimes with Android devices. Why make a "convertible" at all, when you already have everything you need?

Re:It's the OS, Stupid

[dgatwood]

Correct. With that said, although it is derived from OS X, there are some key differences that make it less than ideal for use in a laptop-like environment. In particular, pointing devices become a problem, in part because iOS doesn't really support them, and in part because apps aren't designed in ways that would work well with mice even if it did.

IMO, any usable hybrid device would really need to run the full OS X stack when in laptop mode, with UIKit running in a full-screen Simulator window when used as a tablet. Otherwise, it's just an iPad with an attached keyboard, which isn't really any more interesting than an iPad with a Bluetooth keyboard.

Re:It's the OS, Stupid

[jeffb (2.718)]

2005 called...

Oh my God! Did you warn them? About Beta?

Re: It's the OS, Stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I highly recommend you stop making comments on a subject you know nothing about.

Apple has been getting UNIX 03 certification since 10.5 (Leopard). The recent 10.10 (Yosemite) release received certification on September 24, 2014.

http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/apple.htm

Re:It's the OS, Stupid

[dgatwood]

It isn't the idea that is bad; it is the implementation. One device with two distinct interfaces is a recipe for epic failure. But a single, unified interface that can take input in more than one way is useful, assuming you can get developers to adopt it. Mind you, it isn't a game-changer, and it isn't something that would be useful for every app, which makes it a hard sell, but that doesn't mean the concept lacks merit.

For example, if I had a full-scale laptop with a touchscreen:

• In audio editing apps, I could just reach up and nudge three or four sliders at once, rather than click each of them one at a time. When I need to mute every channel but one, I could reach up and drag across the buttons. And so on. Because mixing isn't something that most people do frequently, you wouldn't have the "gorilla arm" problem. With that said, if you do find yourself doing a lot of mixing, you could always spin the screen around and use it as a tablet, all without interrupting what you're doing, changing apps, moving the content from one device to another, etc.
• In photo editing apps, you could swing the screen around flat, then treat it as a pressure-sensitive art tablet (using either finger press spread or a stylus to detect pressure). Then you could switch back to the normal mode to work with type layers, adjust layer effects, etc.

An iPad can theoretically do both of those things, but lacks the CPU power, storage capacity, and pointing precision to do aspects of either task well. And although you can buy physical control surfaces and digitizer tablets or use an iPad as a controller in conjunction with your laptop, that's nowhere near as convenient as having it all in a single package, and being able to just reach up and interact by touch occasionally.

Perfectly-timed?

[ts383]

Someone will have to explain how putting out a device that immediately gets eclipsed by a Note 4 counted as a perfecry timed attack against Samsung

Are we really going to call it a clone?

[berchca]

Isn't a big iPad just a big iPad?

Re: Perfectly-timed?

[pchasco]

And also years after the original Note and after every other phone manufacturer was producing large phones? If it were not for Apple's former stubborn position on large phones Samsung would likely not become such a big player in the market.

"Perfectly timed"?

[QuietLagoon]

Seems to me that Apple is playing catch-up in the phablet arena. Apple was late to the party and lost the toehold because of its tardiness.

Re:"Perfectly timed"?

[KingOfBLASH]

The fact of the matter is EVERYONE is playing catch up.

When the iPhone 6 (and +) came out, android users started talking about how they'd had swiftkey keyboards, etc., for YEARS.

They conveniently forget about things like how Samsung came out with a fingerprint sensor after apple's introduction, or any of the other features phablet makers played follow to leader to Apple on, like a half baked watch Samsung got out on rumours of the Apple Watch so they could be the first mover.

This is the nature of competition. Samsung, Apple, Microsoft, and any other phablet makers are going to innovate. They'll create unique features for their products. A few years down the road, anything that was a brilliant idea is going to get copied.

So can we please all stop this b.s. of "X is copying Y"?

Re:Bad idea

[93 Escort Wagon]

Sleeve cases for laptops are nothing new - I had one for my second-generation MacBook Air.

I know there really are people like you who like the Surface - I work with a Windows admin that loves his. But having used the latest Pro 3 with the "good" type cover... I don't get the love. Typing is awful, the trackpad is awful, and having to take one of your hands off that keyboard to touch the screen is slow as hell. I watch my coworker use his, and every time he reaches for the screen it's like whatever he's doing shifts to slow motion. it sure looks like a bad concept from top to bottom.

Perfectly-timed?

[slashdice]

The only difference between samsung and every other android manufacturer is the advertising/carrier kickback budget. Samsung can't compete on the low end because it destroys their profit margins. Meanwhile, the low end android manufacturers are quickly becoming mid/high end android manufacturers because that's where the money is at. It's the same story as IBM PC industry, except it took 10 years instead of 30.

Good artists copy, great artists steal -Steve Jobs

[xbytor]

Steve Jobs may have been many things, but Pablo Picasso is not one of them.

Cloning a failure would be a failure....

[CraigCruden]

Cloning something a failure like Surface seems silly, if you're going to clone something clone something that is a success in the marketplace. If I want a table, I will buy an iPad - it works nicely as a consumption device. If I want to do a little more work, I will buy a Macbook Air. I don't really need a touch screen, in fact I find it a little annoying having fingerprints all over the screen. I also tend to sit back when using the computer and having to lean forward to touch the screen is actually more effort than just using my mouse. Call me old fashioned.... but I don't find it an improvement in usability when it comes to working on a computer. It works nicely when you are using an iPad and reading a book or watching a video.... Two different user interfaces in one machine is not useful to most.

Re: Perfectly-timed?

[whoever57]

Apple hasn't really innovated much since Steve left the scene.

And for a long time before Steve left the scene. Apple has been a success by letting other companies release new types of devices and then execute their own version of that type of device. Apple did not create the first portable music player, the first smartphone, the first WIMP interface, etc.. Apple's success has largely been down to executing arguably better versions of devices that already exist in the marketplace. Now, Apple is also benefitting from being perceived as a luxury brand.

Uhh...I doubt it

[real gumby]

These are the same analysts who said that apple needed to make a netbook or they would die (or who each quarter predicted a netbook was coming).

Apple has placed an alternative bet: that the devices can overlap capabilites and responsibilites (e.g. via handoff, or less intensely as with iwork) but have fundamentally different jobs to do, and try to make each do its job well. I don't commute to work in a tank, but some people find tanks useful. The surface, and W8, are neiher tank nor motorbike, and really do neither job well.

Apple changes their mind (and never admits it, as with phablets!) and they also make brain damaged decisions, but there is some method to their madness. Analysts generate quotable sound bites; that is the method behind their madness.

Re: Perfectly-timed?

[Gr8Apes]

Samsung and others have been making lots of money off bigger phones.

You might want to review that statement, Apple appears to be cleaning house on the money side, taking 87% of the profit in the market.

Pace of innovation

[sjbe]

Apple hasn't really innovated much since Steve left the scene.

I see this a lot and I'm not convinced, especially since the guy has only been in the ground for around 3 years. How much does Apple have to do for you to change you mind? Where is the boundary between what you consider innovative and not. What is your evidence that their pace of innovation has slowed? I'm not saying you are right or wrong but you stated it as if it is axiomatic and I don't think I agree. I don't see any other companies really innovating meaningfully faster when you are talking time scales of 5-15 years which is what matters here.

Apple has historically introduced one or two big products per decade. The original Apple Computers came out in the late 1970s. The Macintosh was created in 1984. The iPod in 2001. The iPhone in 2007 and the iPad in 2010 which are really the same device in different form factors. Other products of note were the Apple LaserWriter (first desktop laser printer - Apple dropped the ball on that one) in 1985 and the Newton MessagePad in 1994. (The Apple Watch is too new to decide if it is noteworthy or not) Apple's most grim time financially was during the 1990s when their big bet (the MessagePad) was a flop and they mismanaged the Macintosh. I think people might be confused about their pace of innovation late in Steve Jobs life because they mistakenly consider the iPhone and iPad to be different devices when they really aren't. In fact the iPhone came out to the development for the iPad. They are the same device really.

Companies like Samsung and HTC and others are trying a lot of stuff and most of it is crap but some is good and works. Apple works really hard on a few things and doesn't release as much but their batting average is much better. Neither approach is right or wrong but you have to look at it on a time scale of more than 2-3 years to get a sense of pace of innovation. Realistically we should be having this discussion about 5-7 years in the future.

Product ideas that can move markets the way the Mac and the iDevices have are REALLY hard to come up with. I see some companies like Samsung throwing a lot of stuff out there but most of it is quite unremarkable. I think expectations that Apple would introduce some big market moving product the minute Steve Jobs died is pretty unrealistic. It may turn out that without Jobs the company will founder - they did once before. But we really should wait a few years to see if they really can or cannot come up with their next big success. I think their ApplePay service *might* turn out to be a really big deal but that remains to be seen. I think it is the most interesting new product they've done since the iPad and it certainly could be the most lucrative.

The premise is idiotic.

[jcr]

Microsoft's "Surface" is just the latest round of their "tablet PC" debacle, which had been a continuous failure for over a decade before the iPad was introduced. iPad succeeded because Apple didn't try to shoehorn a desktop OS into a device where it clearly didn't fit.

To suggest that Apple should abandon a successful approach for a failed approach demonstrates that the author should find a different line of work, he's obviously out of his depth writing about the computer industry.

-jcr