The simplest difference is a company that cripples their products to ensure they keep profit margins and $1 TRILLION in the bank.

It's not a better product, it's just a profit machine.

Then go buy the better product, it’s a free market. Whenever Apple is no longer fulfilling the expectations of their customer, they will start to lose market share to their competitors that do. So go ahead, buy that Android tablet.

Personally, I was shocked that they did the thing that people have been asking them to do for years. I expected them to continue to dig their heels in and ship another halfstep / half-assed measure.

I think it's hilarious that people will buy an iPhone, iPad and Macbook and not realize the only thing that's different about them is the software. Any restriction is manufactured.

edit: apparently I've upset some Apple users. I apologize. My point was that the features each class of device has is manufactured to ensure you buy 3 products instead of 1 while the hardware inside is essentially the same. Like restricting touch and pen support isn't about hardware limitations; it's about getting you to spend. If you're happy with a company that does that you, then hey you do you, but don't get upset when that fact is pointed out.

As someone who uses and enjoys a MacBook, but who has recently moved away from iOS; one of the biggest problems I have with tech right now is how much ALL of the companies cripple their products so as to not cannibalise another. And I think Apple are the worst for it.

I have a 6th gen iPad mini. It's form factor is perfect for hand held reading, social media, and the like. If I could plug it into a monitor and use Stage Manager to carry out light computing tasks it would be perfect. But Apple decided it simply wasn't powerful enough, so didn't enable it. It absolutely could do that, but that would have been one less selling point for the Airs and Pros. So Apple restricted it.

I'm old enough to remember when you'd buy computing stuff that had no restrictions beyond what it was physically capable of. You could buy a shitty graphics card and you could play a game, but if the card wasn't up to the task it would run like crap. There are games and apps you literally cannot buy for lower end models of Apple devices. If you've already bought it on a device that can run it, it's not available to another that can't.

All so they can maintain their air of quality.

Fuck Apple. They make great hardware, but they're run by cunts.

Have you used a Surface Pro? It’s a terrible tablet and a terrible laptop. Thats what the iPad would be if it ran MacOS. Also the battery life would be horrendous. Maybe as an option or something but if it’s not gonna be used by a significant chunk of usersApple is not going to spend time on it. People online are not representative of the market.

I don't think a macbook can fit in my pocket ... and I don't think the (virtual) keyboard on an iphone is a "manufactured restriction" compared to a macbook

A small box you can stick into 3 different cases, one looking like a laptop, another like a tablet and another like a phone, can.

Or a phone you stick into the former two, like a dock station. One could do this with Ubuntu Phone, sadly they failed.

One can argue that the case of a MacBook and its screen and the keyboard account for much of its cost, but I think the fact itself that it's a single device with different UIs would make many situations more convenient. No need to synchronize files - it's already the same storage medium. No need to charge 3 separate devices. No need to stop your work when switching.

And yeah, I still think the "computer" part costs a lot.

It has been done before. It was deemed impractical.

Has been done before by whom and for what?

Say, the particular case could have been a failure because of Android not being a very good desktop OS, or the hardware being too weak. I can't think of a precedent though, even such.

Deemed impractical by whom and for what?

Say, if it was a braindead monkey or an Apple fanboy, then irrelevant.