Such as high-resolution image editing and high-definition video editing. Compared to a web browser, these aren't quite as amenable to splitting an application into numerous "content processes," each with their own separate 2 GB RAM.

For a while, Linux supported an x86-64 ABI called "x32" that limits each process's address space to 2 GB so that more pointers will fit in the processor's data cache. It didn't become popular, in part because of a need to load three versions of the system libraries: 32-bit i686, x86-64, and "x32". In addition, porting x86-64 applications to use less pointer-heavy containers gave most of the cache advantage that "x32" would have provided. This includes switching from linked lists to gap buffers (or other dynamic arrays), from B-trees to T-trees, or from pointers to indices in a pool. Rust in particular has encouraged use of appropriately sized indices as a workaround for the borrow checker.

There's a widespread misconception that a 32-bit operating system is limited to 3 GB of physical RAM. I think this comes from Microsoft's practice of requiring drivers for 32-bit Windows Server to support PAE as a condition for certification, but not drivers for 32-bit Windows desktop. I seem to remember 32-bit desktop Linux being more PAE-friendly. PAE and content processes are how Firefox for 32-bit Linux managed to hang on this long.

And I'm guessing you still did not spring for the iPad Pro.

If only they didn't keep sending away people who weren't gang members based on false accusations and thinly veiled racism.

The problem is that an iPad Pro is mostly only useful as a portable streaming device, but costs as much as a laptop ($1300). Meanwhile, you can get an Android tablet of similar size for under $200, which is about what one would reasonably expect to pay for a portable streaming device that is going to get mistreated by your kids and eventually broken.

The product just doesn't make sense at its price point.

More the point, when it came time to find a tablet for use on my electronic organ, the iPad Pro wasn't even a serious consideration. To use it for that would have been a minimum of $1300 for one, and would have likely meant wanting to have two side by side, for a whopping $2600, and trying to figure out a way to control them both simultaneously would have also been infeasible.

Instead, I bought an Android tablet for $450 that is big enough to show two pages at once, controlled by BTLE buttons in the piston bar and USB foot switches mounted for easy knee control. The extent to which Android works better than iPad for that purpose was jaw-dropping.

And if and when I decide that I need a more portable tablet for reading sheet music and my choice is between a $1300 iPad Pro and a $199 13-inch Android tablet from Walmart, you can safely assume I will buy the latter as well. Why? Because it's a single-purpose device, and an iPad provides no obvious second purpose that isn't already fulfilled WAY better by my laptop. I can run 100% of the software that I need to run on my laptop. I can run 5% of the software that I need to run on an iPad.

The iPad Pro, as currently designed, is a waste of money for most users, and cannot fill any large enough niche for a majority of users to justify its price point, with the possible exception of people who use a computer only for browsing the web. And truthfully, most of them don't want to pay the price of a good laptop for something that's only a half-a**ed toy by comparison, but at least they *could*.

Yeah, Apple missed the mark. Very badly. And we've been saying it for more than a decade.

At this point, it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that they should have made limited use of all Mac apps possible on iPadOS, and also made it easy to write apps that mix UIKit and AppKit views arbitrarily, so that Mac apps can be converted to UIKit a piece at a time, adding gesture-based controls and floating button palettes and other approaches for making the app usable on iPadOS without a mouse, while still using the rendering code for their complex views and stuff, rather than forcing app developers to completely rewrite their user interfaces from scratch for iOS.

And at this point, it should be obvious to anyone with the slightest clue that not having support for 100% of Mac apps makes iPad Pro unusable as a laptop replacement for a majority of users. The folks who could switch mostly already have, but the problem is that the vast majority of users have a few apps that they run that don't work on iOS, and they are *different* apps, so you can't even point at a few dozen or even a few hundred apps and apply pressure on them to convert their apps and make major headway.

Open up iPad Pro or delete one digit from the price point. Those are the only two options that would make it a real contender in the market, IMO.

We do look elsewhere. There's just not anything else on the market that has any real potential, either.

iPad could have been the laptop killer. Instead, the iPad peaked back in 2013, and sales have been pretty steadily declining since then. The problem is in part that the only thing they are really good at is media consumption, and once people buy one, they don't ever need to replace it, because the new ones aren't meaningfully better for that purpose.

And when they do replace them, they often end up buying some cheap Android tablet to replace them, because the iPad isn't meaningfully better for that purpose than Android tablets costing a fraction as much.

The biggest problem with Apple for users probably isn't any of their anticompetitive shit, but rather their bifurcated OS. Software which could be sold on both platforms is commonly only on one or the other. Tablets have enough screen and enough power to do real PC jobs but are prohibited from doing them because Apple wants to sell you both an iPad and a Macintosh. Android-based tablets can run emulators to get around these problems, or run full apps which can run on ARM Linux in Termux or another solution. TBF Google seems to have Apple envy and is aiming to lock down their systems more and not less so maybe they will throw away this advantage.

Profitable? This could be expensive for Apple. Apple has given iPhone a sock. iPhone is FREEEEEEEEEEE!

Each function could be loaded the first time the user uses it. The device has to be online to query what is in stock at any given moment anyway. And I'd be interested in others' speculation about why the client side of the most widely used functions can't all fit in (say) 5 MB, which is twice the size of Doom.

I accept that, adding a clarification that I suggested the solution for the purpose of asking other people what these companies might know that I don't.

OMG, I'm so stealing that ;)

Do they also provide build tools and allow customers to build and install their own images?

You have to have punishments to stop the people who are stopped by the threat of them. Those people do exist. We don't think about them much because the existing deterrents work just fine on them.

But you also shouldn't waste your time either believing that they will deter everyone, nor that stronger punishments will deter statistically more people. There are always those who think they won't get caught, and those who don't care.

Somehow authoritarians always forget the carrot. The stick isn't invalid, it just isn't a complete solution, and you shouldn't be rushing to apply it in all situations.

What's stopping you? There's definitely people doing this right now. Around a quarter of the continental US is BLM land. Last I looked pig tags were free.

"Woke" simply means "I'm conservative, and the thing I'm calling 'Woke' is something that I hate". It has no well-defined meaning beyond that. I've heard things as diverse as "the concept of the Metaverse" and "removing copyrighted content so you don't get sued" described as "woke".

No call by push value or P vs NP or complexity theory etc.

So a different set of things that are also useless to the vast majority of people?