> M4 makes the new iPad Pro an outrageously powerful device for artificial intelligence.
Isn’t there a ToS prohibition about “custom coding” in iOS? Like, the only way you can ever use that hardware directly is for developers who go through Apple Developer Program, which last time I heard was bitter lemon? Tell me if I’m wrong.
Well, this is the heart of the "appliance" model. iPads are appliances. You wouldn't ask about running custom code on your toaster or your blender, so you shouldn't ask about that for your iPad. Also all the common reasons apply: Security and Privacy, Quality Control, Platform Stability and Compatibility, and Integrated User Experience. All of these things are harmed when you are allowed to run custom coding.
(disclaimer: My personal opinion is that the "appliance" model is absurd, but I've tried to steel-man the case for it)
That may be your personal preference, but you should accept that 99% of people don't care about programming their toaster, so you're very unlikely to ever make progress in this fight.
Could apply this for anything complex and packaged.
I’m annoyed that I can’t buy particular engines off the shelf and use them in my bespoke approach, why dont car manufacturers give the approach that crate engine providers do?
Then I wish you the best of luck in your fight. In the meantime, don't drag me down or tell me that I'm wrong just because you, personally, don't want something that I want that also doesn't harm you in the slightest.
> If you sell me a CPU, I want the power to program it, period.
Uhhh, there are CPUs in your frickin' wires now, dude! There are several CPUs in you car for which you generally don't have access. Ditto for your fridge. Your microwave. Your oven. Even your toaster.
We're literally awash in CPUs. You need to update your thinking.
Now, if you said something like "if you sell me a general-purpose computing device, then I want the power to program it, period" then I would fully agree with you. BTW, you can develop software for your own personal use on the iPad. It's not cheap or easy (doesn't utilize commonly-used developer tooling), but it can be done without having to jump through any special hoops.
Armed with that, we can amend your statement to "if you sell me a general-purpose computing device, then I want the power to program it using readily-available, and commonly-utilized programming tools."
I think that statement better captures what I presume to be your intent.
> but it can be done without having to jump through any special hoops.
You are really stretching the definition of "special hoops" here. On Android sideloading is a switch hidden in your settings menu; on iOS it's either a municipal feature or a paid benefit of their developer program.
Relative to every single other commercial, general-purpose operating system I've used, I would say yeah, Apple practically defines what "special hoops" look like online.
I do actually want the ability to program the CPUs in my car the same way I'm able to buy parts and mods for every mechanical bit in there down to the engine. In fact we have laws about that sort of thing that don't apply to the software.
I mean this sincerely, are you really an Apple customer then? I feel exactly the same as you, and for that reason I don't buy Apple products. They are honest about what they sell, which I appreciate.
Ever notice people don't build their own cars anymore? They used to even up through the 60's. I mean ordering a kit or otherwise purchasing all the components and building the car. Nowadays it's very rare that people do that.
I'm old enough to remember when people literally built their own computers, soldering iron in hand. People haven't done that since the early 80's.
Steve Jobs' vision of the Mac, released in 1984, was for it to be a computing appliance - "the computer for the rest of us." The technology of the day prevented that. Though they pushed that as hard as they could.
Today's iPad? It's the fulfillment of Steve Jobs' original vision of the Mac: a computing appliance. It took 40 years, but we're here.
If you don't want a computing appliance then don't buy an iPad. I'd go further and argue don't buy any tablet device. Those that don't want computing appliances don't have to buy them. It's not like laptops, or even desktops, are going anywhere anytime soon.
> If you don't want a computing appliance then don't buy an iPad.
If you do want a computing appliance, then there's nothing wrong with having a machine that could be reprogrammed that you simply choose not to reprogram. Please stop advocating for a worse world for the rest of us when it doesn't benefit you in the slightest to have a machine that you don't control.
Stop being so damned melodramatic. I'm not advocating for a "worse world for the rest of us." There are a plethora of choices for machines that aren't appliances. In fact, the overwhelming majority of machines are programmable. Apple thinks the market wants a computing appliance. The market will decide. Meanwhile, you have lots of other choices.
Agree completely. I think it's absurd that they talk about technical things like CPU and memory in these announcements. It seems to me like an admission that it's not really an "appliance" but trying to translate Apple marketing into logical/coherent concepts can be a frustrating experience. I just don't try anymore.
I appreciate the steel-man. A strong counter argument for me is that you actually can run any custom code on an iPad, as long as it's in a web-browser. This is very unlike an appliance where doing so is not possible. Clearly the intention is for arbitrary custom code to run on it, which makes it a personal computer and not an appliance (and should be regulated as such).
That's a fair point, although (steel-manning) the "custom code" in the browser is severely restricted/sandboxed, unlike "native" code would be. So from that perspective, you could maybe expand it to be like a toaster that has thousands of buttons that can make for hyper-specific stuff, but can't go outside of the limits the manufacturer built in.
As with any Apple device — or honestly, any computing device in general — my criteria of evaluation would be the resulting performance if I install Linux on it. (If Linux is not installable on the device, the performance is zero. If Linux driver support is limited, causing performance issues, that is also part of the equation.)
NB: those are my criteria of evaluation. Very personally. I'm a software engineer, with a focus on systems/embedded. Your criteria are yours.
(But maybe don't complain if you buy this for its "AI" capabilities only to find out that Apple doesn't let you do anything "unapproved" with it. You had sufficient chance to see the warning signs.)
There's the potential option of Swift Playgrounds which would let you write / run code directly on the iPad without any involvement in the developer program.
You're not wrong. It's why I don't use apple hardware anymore for work or play. On Android and Windows I can build and install whatever I like, without having to go through mother-Apple for permission.
Isn’t there a ToS prohibition about “custom coding” in iOS? Like, the only way you can ever use that hardware directly is for developers who go through Apple Developer Program, which last time I heard was bitter lemon? Tell me if I’m wrong.