upvote
A little computer board is only a fraction of the BOM of a laptop, so a 'lapdock' of equivalent quality couldn't be very much cheaper than a whole laptop.

If you use cloud storage, your laptop already has all the stuff on your phone anyway.

reply
There isn't much demand for using phone as computer. If you are at home or work, you can buy a desktop computers for cheap. If you are traveling, you need to find a monitor and keyboard. You could carry small monitor and wireless keyboard, but then you are carrying as much as laptop. People who need to work on the road get a laptop. People who need to send email get iPad and keyboard.

Good example of the economics is that Macbook Neo or iPad Air are cheaper than new iPhone.

iPhone should export display, but more for showing videos or presentations. My Pixel 10 has USB-C display and I haven't used it, but I have computers for all purposes.

Apple should spend more effort making the iPad usable for work. It would be good candidate for USB-C display, but with iPadOS.

reply
On an upcoming trip I'm actually going to give an iPad with magnetic keyboard I bought a couple years back, assuming different travel patterns than I've had, a try. It seems to work fine. An iPad is also great for plane/train entertainment without a keyboard. But, honestly, it's no lighter than a MacBook Air would be and if my ancient MacBook Pro dies--have a newer one up in my office--that's what I'll probably buy.

I have traveled with just my iPhone and can get by but don't really love it.

reply
FWIW, you can plug your iPhone into an external monitor to do a Keynote presentation. You need a USB-C (or Lightning) to HDMI dongle in most cases, but it works fine.

- https://support.apple.com/guide/keynote-iphone/present-on-a-...

reply
I'm always reluctant to do non-standard stuff for presentations. There's enough that can go wrong even with a direct HDMI out. I've done it in a pinch but pretty much always carry a laptop with me when I'm presenting along with local copies of my presentations. I've actually gotten a text in the middle of the night asking me if I can fill in for another speaker who forgot and are in a different country :-)
reply
Imagine an executive placing their phone on a magnetic dock as they sit down, which automagically connects to the screen and gives them access to everything they were doing before. Also easy to imagine a university computer lab where everyone brings their own compute and IT doesn't have to manage physical desktops.

I'm skeptical that there's "no demand" for that kind of functionality rather than a lack of good implementations. Look at how popular wireless CarPlay and Android Auto are. They're essentially the same functionality, but tailored to an in-car experience instead of desktop.

reply
Imagine executive tapping their phone down on reader, and it pops up everything they were doing, and they get to keep using their phone.

The first flaw in the idea is that computing is cheap. You can make a computer the size of a phone for people to carry around, that has been tried but failed. The second flaw is that everything is in the cloud, only developers and offline need local access to their files. The cloud also means that can desktop in the cloud.

reply
deleted
reply
How can there be demand for something that doesn't exist?

If Apple releases a $300 lapdock tomorrow, basically a screen, keyboard, battery, that allows using your iPhone as a normal general purpose computer with OSX - why would anyone buy a laptop/desktop?

reply
Why would anyone buy that instead of Macbook Neo for $600? Macbook doesn't need a iPhone to use.

If you are doing serious work, which are the people who want a dock, then you need the power of Macbook Air or Macbook Pro.

For most people, iPad or iPad Air with keyboard is a better option since you get tablet for fun and can do some light work.

reply
I think Apple is just really careful about how they segment their product line for each use case, and would never go for a "jack of all trades" solution like this.
reply
Why would Apple want to sell a lapdock when they could instead sell you the same thing + a redundant SOC (aka, a MacBook) and then high-margin cloud services to sync all of your data between your two differently-shaped computers?
reply
Because most people with iPhones are buying Windows computers, but give them a cheap entry lapdock into the Mac ecosystem and maybe their next more powerful system will be a Mac.

Mac is a niche right now, iPhone with OSX could level the playing field.

reply
It would decimate their own business.
reply
This. The more locked down, the less in control we are, the higher margins they command. This is why app stores exist - it has nothing to do with safety or security, and everything to do with monopolizing the distribution supply chain from soup to nuts. Don’t like it? Too bad, it’s fully locked down and cracking it is a (potentially) criminal offense, so whaddayagonnadoaboutit?!
reply
Because people like TFA pay them not to. It doesn't matter how much you hope Apple changes course - you vote with your wallet.
reply
Why would it decimate the Windows market? From my experience, there's a strong correlation between iPhone and Mac usage.

Looking at the stats, the Win:Mac ratio is 4:1 but Android:iPhone only 2:1 so it might hurt Windows. But if iPhone users are more likely to use Mac or don't use computers much already, then expanding iPhone capabilities would cannibalize Apple business.

reply
Because then most people with an iPhone wouldn't need to buy a separate laptop/desktop. I'm sure Android as well would follow in short order (not the half hearted attempts they've made so far). Sales would plummet. Windows decimated.
reply
No, the iPhone has over 50% market share in the US, macOS is nowhere near that.
reply
I think there are a number of reasons why Apple specifically hasn't done this. In addition to what others have already mentioned (demand, segmentation, profitability, etc), another factor would probably be difficulty with the overall design.

Part of why Apple's products are often praised for their design is that they do a few things really well and focus on those things, instead of trying to do absolutely everything. Consider the iPod, the iPhone, Apple TV, etc -- they're all pretty focused on doing certain things and Apple's really polished the experience. The Mac desktops and laptops kind of stretch this by allowing more things, but they still largely try to focus the user into certain workflows, via the plethora of apps that come standard with macOS and the vendor lock-in that they push.

Making a phone that can also be a full computer goes against these design principles. Apple's closed the gap a bit in recent years by making macOS and iOS a bit more similar than they used to be, but they're still pretty different. If you're on a M1/2/3/4/etc processor laptop and you've tried using an iOS-specific app (not ones that's designed for both phone and desktop) on it, you'll see some of those differences (interfaces tuned for touch are weird with a mouse, things are sized wrong for desktop, file restrictions can be weird, keyboard input can be lacking, etc etc etc), and it's not enjoyable. Going the other direction, the first thing that pops into my head is: how in the world would the mac desktop be represented on iOS? I'm someone who keeps a lot of files on his desktop, grouped in different sections of the screen for different reasons, and I have no idea how that would be represented on a relatively tiny phone screen (at least in a way that didn't destroy my intentional groups). There are other aspects of macOS that would prove tricky to have analogs on a phone screen, too, but this reply is already getting so long that very few will read it...

Now that's not to say that it's impossible. In fact it probably isn't. But there would be compromises (and those compromises would be on top of the compromises already present in iOS/macOS). To do it well, it'd be a much bigger project than most people realize. It's not just changing a few options and letting us use our phone that way. It'd be more akin to designing the first iPhone. Note that it's not just Apple who hasn't done this yet. Literally _no one_ has done it well yet. I truly hope one day Apple (or someone else, even) does it well, since that'll be a glorious day. But it'd be a huge project, so I'm not holding my breath.

reply
That would also seriously hurt the sales of Macs. Even more so now that the Neo exists.
reply
It would explode sales of Mac. OSX on iPhone, people wouldn't need the separate Windows laptops they're used to. OSX on iPhone is the gateway for consumers into the OSX ecosystem.

And when those consumers want more powerful hardware, instead of buying a more powerful Windows laptop/desktop - they buy a Mac instead.

I feel like Apple knows this as well, so I can't figure out why they haven't pulled the trigger. Anti-trust risk? lol

reply
Money.

The general public thinks phones and computers are fundamentally different. Heck, I remember arguing this point even on HN back when smart phones were first coming out and being generally on the losing side as people got very excited about "app stores" and such. I see no practical path to getting to the point that enough of us realize that there is simply no reason for our phones to be locked down the way they are that the companies are forced to undo it, especially with our elites pushing with all they are worth to lock things down harder.

The companies take that confusion to the bank.

There have been numerous attempts at making phone/laptop crossovers, where you can plug your phone into a dock and get a computer, or slide your phone into a laptop case, etc. Some of them are even still around, but they're all definitely second-class citizens. There's a variety of problems that I think they've had in the market, not least of which is the fact that the average person still sees "phones" and "computers" as fundamentally different so the product makes no sense to them, but another issue that I think has held them back is that the product inevitably work by porting the limitations of the phone into the computer, rather than porting the freedom of the computer into the phone.

In the USB-C era, there is no excuse for every phone not having a mode where you can plug it into any ol' USB-C hub/dock and be able to get a desktop environment, even down to the "middle-of-the-line" phones. It would require in most cases no extra hardware. They just don't.

reply
Money? You don't think Apple would make a killing on OSX licenses and lapdock sales if they allowed OSX on iPhone tomorrow?

Mac is a tiny slice of revenue for apple. OSX on iPhone would blow it out of the water. Apple would turn the PC market upside down, taking a sizeable chunk from Windows. As there'd be no point for most people to have a separate laptop/desktop at that point.

People also thought that phones needed keyboards before Apple showed them a better way. This is all on Apple to make a reality, no one else can bring general purpose computing to iPhone except them. It's their choice to make.

reply
Other than UI and other surface differences, the fundamental distinction between a Mac and an iDevice is... what it is.

A Mac is a real computer. I can run any code I want on it. I have root.

An iDevice is like a game console. I can only run App Store apps (without jumping through a lot of hoops). I do not have root (without again jumping through many hoops or ugly hacks).

If Apple wanted to unify the platform they have two choices. The first is to abandon the "real computer" market entirely. The second is to make iDevices real computers by unlocking them.

I suspect they'd rather keep two platforms.

Under the hood they both share a lot of code, so it's not two totally distinct platforms. It's more like two sets of defaults and two "skins."

reply
I think the friction of using a keyboard/pointing device with a touchscreen, or fingers with a desktop interface, is too high to unify them. I know it's been done, I'm unconvinced it's been done well.
reply
MacBook Neo has in a way unified the platforms. The only difference is essentially what OS is booted up with the chip.
reply
That was already the case with the M-series chips, which are shared between Macs and higher-end iPads. The Neo just extends it to the A-series as well.
reply
Yep I know, and now using a last gen A chip, I feel they are really rubbing our faces in it.

Like Apple is saying, "Nice iPhone 17 Pro w/ A19 w/ vapor cooling chip you have there; you know you run a full general purpose OS on it, but we're not gonna let you, nanananana :p"

reply
No exactly, Apple is playing in our faces, all while people continue to defend the “differences” of device categories and the subsequent justification of shipping iPhones and iPads with locked bootloaders.
reply
Unless you work for Apple or hold significant stock then I don’t see the logic in defending this choice to hamstring the iPhone.

But even as an investor, I think Apple could bring a lot of people/money to the Mac ecosystem by getting them in with an iPhone lapdock.

reply
The form factor is a major difference.

HNers are significantly more technical than the median consumer and are used to text and keyboard interfaces - a large portion of humanity isn't. You see this with Foundation Models as well - most have started to shift away from only concentrating on text to TTS and STT usecases.

Also, DeX style monitor screen share with a Bluetooth keyboard has been supported since iOS 15.

Additionally, a major portion of Apple's desktop revenue is coming from poweruser and specialist demand - IT departments bulk purchasing developer laptops, designers having their entire design workflow within the MacOS environment, and video editors heavily dependent on MacOS.

Furthermore, arguments about how Apple has an incentive not to cannibalize revenue are dumb, given how open Apple is to cannibalizing revenue where PMF exists (eg. the iPad Pro versus lower tier MacBooks or the MacBook Neo versus lower tier iPads).

reply
The entire Mac line is a teeny tiny slice of revenue compared to iPhone. Allowing OSX on iPhone would increase the utility of iPhone, leading to more sales.
reply
> Allowing OSX on iPhone would increase the utility of iPhone, leading to more sales

That assumption is not necessarily true.

What this implies is that there is a market of existing consumers that would not buy an iPhone because it lacks OSX support.

The iPhone portion of Apple's business generates around $144B in YoY revenue in Q1FY27 [0].

Whenever an organization contemplates building a net new capability like the one you mentioned, a quick test is whether it would be able to generate and sustain at minimum the equivalent of 1% of yearly revenue.

If this was a $1B revenue opportunity it would have been implemented, but it's not.

Nor is it a feature that can actively or dramatically increase Apple's market share in most markets.

A good proxy of such demand would have been a sudden increase in iOS users using USB-C screen share and a Bluetooth keyboard to interface with an iPhone in a desktop form factor (something which has been enabled since iOS 15), but such an increase has not happened.

[0] - https://counterpointresearch.com/en/insights/apple-reaches-a...

reply