Apple Still Expected to Allow iPhone and iPad Apps to Run on Macs Later This Year

[Solomani]

This is actually a good idea

Or it could turn out be a very bad idea. It could potentially harm already tepid Mac development, if devs find out all they need to do is to simply develop for iOS (already a profitable and competitive platform), and never bother even making anything specific for OSX. For them, it's that analogy of laziness, that they can kill 2 birds with one stone.

 

[dan110]

If Apple can pull this off, I'm all for it as there are certainly some apps I use on my iPad or iPhone that I'd like to monkey around with on the desktop.

At the same time, this will be crushing for some developers who have iOS and macOS versions who have to make a choice ... do I make a truly universal app and raise the price or keep my apps separated between iOS and macOS?

An example of this is the fantastic Fantastical calendaring app. The iOS versions are inexpensive, but if you want the same experience on macOS, it is much more. I think for great apps like this that people put their heart and lives into, we should pay for what we use. If I can run an iOS version of Fantastical on macOS, the desktop revenue stream dries up. Also, any motivation for Flexibits to update the desktop version drops dramatically. For other apps like this, if the developer doesn't make it a universal app, however, I may be less-inclined to run it on all my devices or find an alternative that does.

There are definitely winners and losers in this equation. What do you think?

You hit the nail on the head. As I and others have said before, Tim and Company are trying to kill the MacBook and replace it with a truly dumbed down internet appliance in the form of a "iPad Pro Book" of some sort. They might keep around one real computer such as the Mac for developers to "develop", but the writing is on the wall. If you're business and life depends on developing for Apple products, their might be some very tough times ahead if you don't make the right decisions at the right time for the right reasons.

 

[69650]

I prefer iOS Apps that also have a Mac App so I can use the same App across all my devices. If this makes the whole development process easier then I’m in favour of it.

 

[Soccertess]

very interesting Craig, I'm sure he will do a better job than Microsoft. This is why you need to be CEO!

I can see ipads and macbooks being merged in 3 years.

 

[Dave245]

I can see ipads and macbooks being merged in 3 years.

I really hope not!! I enjoy the fact that they are separate and have their own functionality.

 

[thekeyring]

Then will a touchscreen make sense on a laptop Apple???

No.

Lets say you have a finder window. You touch the screen and, without lifting your finger from the display, move your finger down along the screen.

What happens? Does it drag select multiple icons, does it drag and drop an icon, or does it scroll your field of view?

 

[xxray]

My theory and also that of many that I work with is that Apple is trying to train consumers to move away from dedicated personal computers. They may keep 1 or 2 models around for hard core developers, but the "Mac" as we know it seems to a dead man walking. They're going to try to push the iPad Pro or some facsimile to fill the void left by a defunct MacBook line.

Hmm maybe... I think this is what their plan used to be. But their actions the past year have proved otherwise in my opinion. Mac Pro and Thunderbolt Display is on the way. iMac Pro was created and released. The iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, and even the MacBook Air were updated at WWDC too.

 

[dgdosen]

I wonder whether the 'Macs' that iOS apps will run on may include (or even be limited to) new ARM-based Mac app Store-only Macs.

Offering a Macbook-priced combo Mac/iOS notebook computer with both touchscreen (iOS apps only) and trackpad would be a Grail device for normal everyday computer users and students, would give Apple higher margins (no Intel Tax) and increased revenue (and relevancy) to the Mac App Store. It would make these lower-end Macs more secure and easier to administer for large-scale deployments (businesses, schools)

I searched through this thread for `ARM` because a few of these posts taken together show a few remarkable coincidences:
- Apple is holding off on making changes to macos
- Apple will let iOS apps run on a mac
- Apple makes fast, low-powered chips faster than intel chips
- Intel is slow to release updates
- Apple has been a bit slow coming out with new stuff of late
- I think I remember the ATP guys talking about a hybrid laptop and debating how it might work.

I'll bet Apple used (cooperated with?) the ATP guys to put out a flyer for some kind of hybrid device. They can come out with an ARM laptop/convertible device that's marketable to 70-80% of computer users - and if they can control more of that production chain (keep the profits on chips) - then they'll do it.

That's probably one reason why they're trying to market the iPad as a replacement for a computer (what's a computer?). Some people are buying into that marketing. I can't see myself ever using something like that - but my parents - sure. Other family members - maybe. I'd miss iTerm and Vim too much I'd say all these things are a harbinger of a new hybrid this year. I'd just rather have a Macbook with a few more ports at a price comfortably under $2,000.

 

[ugahairydawgs]

Except I need to use programs for work (not apps) - like LibreOffice, full Lightroom, VMWare etc - the latter will not work well on an A-series chip that needs to translate instruction sets to x86...

That's working under the assumption of how programs are currently constructed. Major vendors, like Adobe and VMWare, will adapt just like they did with the PowerPC>Intel transition.

I feel like a lot of the problem with the discussion about this is that people are assuming that the apps that will be the result of this transition are the same as what we have now on iOS and that what we have on the Mac will be replaced by dumbed down versions of whatever the developer currently offers. I personally don't see how that would possibly be the case.

 

[Wawajey]

Would be nice if you can access your mac using your phone to give it commands like start up, open an app, control the app on a Mac using a phone or iPad

 

[Aston441]

It will likely be with new Macs not yet announced.

Hm. Ax processor in the new MacBook announcing in March?

 

[kemal]

Need to sell more of their overpriced trackpads I guess.

 

[Mac 128]

Hmm maybe... I think this is what their plan used to be. But their actions the past year have proved otherwise in my opinion. Mac Pro and Thunderbolt Display is on the way. iMac Pro was created and released. The iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, and even the MacBook Air were updated at WWDC too.

Then they should have not run the iPad commercial where the mom asks her daughter what she's doing on her computer, and the little girl asks "what's a computer?"

I think we're gonna see Lightning ports added to Macs as soon as iOS apps are introduced for the Mac, or at least an adapter finally so we can use Lightning headphones on the Macs.

 

[Stella]

I can see ipads and macbooks being merged in 3 years.

That would not be good at all.

iPads seriously lack the capabilities and flexibility of a MacBook laptops.
[doublepost=1517430822][/doublepost]

Nothing what you've quoted are remarkable 'coincidences'. Its just you adding 1 + 1 and getting 3.

I searched through this thread for `ARM` because a few of these posts taken together show a few remarkable coincidences:
- Apple is holding off on making changes to macos

They've been holding off for years. Apple's focus isn't on OSX anymore. Nothing to do with replacing ARM with Intel chips inside Apple computers. Apple didn't slow down OSX development when changing from PPC to Intel.

- Apple will let iOS apps run on a Mac

You misunderstand the functionality. This is about distributing multiple platforms in one app container. Not running iOS apps on Mac OS. You can run iOS app on OSX today via emulation.

Attempting to run iOS apps on Mac OS would be an utter UI failure. The GUI needs to be re-written for the platform as appropriate. You can't just take an app with a Touch Screen UI and expect that very same UI to work on a non touch screen device.

- Apple makes fast, low-powered chips faster than intel chips
- Intel is slow to release updates

CPU development is difficult. Ask Apple / Motorola / IBM about PPC chip development - they became pathetic. Apple had to switch to Intel after the failure of the G5.

Hmm. Link please. Running ARM chips inside iPhones / iPads then benchmarking and comparing against different CPUs inside different architectures isn't accurate. There are no public real world comparisons of running an Apple ARM processor against Mac OS.

- Apple has been a bit slow coming out with new stuff of late

Apple are quite capable of working on multiple products at once. ARM enabled computers won't slow down other products. Again, Apple didn't slow their computer range when they converted from PPC -> Intel.

 

[Seoras]

Adding a new platform is always warmly welcomed by App developers. Dare I hope for "Windows" too? Oh the irony...
[doublepost=1517431122][/doublepost]In a way iPhone/iPad App's already run on Macs thanks for the Simulator app that comes bundled with Xcode.
Tricky to use since it's a touch interface in some instances.
If you develop apps it's often easier just to load onto a real device to do things like gesture control (pinch to zoom/shrink, force touch, shake etc).
I'd question the validity of this rumor since Apple hasn't added touch screens to any of it's Mac hardware to date and has stated that they don't like it.

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

I know the article said that we do not know how this would work. But in most likelihood, will they be emulating iOS on the Mac? Or are they asking developers to port everything over to the Mac as a condition of staying in the app store?

Most likely it's a shared API that can compile to both ARM and Intel chipsets. It's one step closer to ditching Intel.

It will be the developers' responsibility to create separate but similar user experiences that are tailored to macOS and iOS.

Developers will have to opt in to the new API. I don't think Apple is going to make it a requirement. Some iOS apps make no sense at all on macOS, and vice versa.

 

[Partron22]

Seems to me that this Major undertaking will mean that OS 10.14 (Lassen?) will come out even more bug ridden that High Sierra.
Unless they go on a hiring binge, they don't have the Mac programming staff to tackle this cleanly.
I'd sooner see a 10.14 which is a !0.13 done right.

 

[satchmo]

So Balmer was right?

 

[mi7chy]

Windows 10!!!!

Actually, more like ChromeOS running mobile apps on desktop OS. Windows 10 would be running MacOS software on iOS.

 

[rhett7660]

That would not be good at all.

iPads seriously lack the capabilities and flexibility of a MacBook laptops.
[doublepost=1517430822][/doublepost]

Nothing what you've quoted are remarkable 'coincidences'. Its just you adding 1 + 1 and getting 3.

They've been holding off for years. Apple's focus isn't on OSX anymore. Nothing to do with replacing ARM with Intel chips inside Apple computers. Apple didn't slow down OSX development when changing from PPC to Intel.

You misunderstand the functionality. This is about distributing multiple platforms in one app container. Not running iOS apps on Mac OS. You can run iOS app on OSX today via emulation.

Attempting to run iOS apps on Mac OS would be an utter UI failure. The GUI needs to be re-written for the platform as appropriate. You can't just take an app with a Touch Screen UI and expect that very same UI to work on a non touch screen device.

CPU development is difficult. Ask Apple / Motorola / IBM about PPC chip development - they became pathetic. Apple had to switch to Intel after the failure of the G5.

Hmm. Link please. Running ARM chips inside iPhones / iPads then benchmarking and comparing against different CPUs inside different architectures isn't accurate. There are no public real world comparisons of running an Apple ARM processor against Mac OS.

Apple are quite capable of working on multiple products at once. ARM enabled computers won't slow down other products. Again, Apple didn't slow their computer range when they converted from PPC -> Intel.

I ask because I don't know, do you think Apple could have both chips running on a device and then code in the OS that if "APP" launches, have it launch on the ARM chip, while the OS runs on the Intel side of the shop?

 

[npmacuser5]

I actually prefer using my MacBook over the iPad. The reason the iPad has any place in my needs, apps. If apps work on the MacBook or a newer Mac, see ya iPad.

 

[sracer]

So Balmer was right?

Essentially, yes.

Actually, more like ChromeOS running mobile apps on desktop OS. Windows 10 would be running MacOS software on iOS.

I think it is reversed. Windows 10 (a desktop OS) can run mobile apps (modern UI). This news indications that macOS (desktop OS) will be able to run mobile apps (iOS).

 

[mi7chy]

Tell me: What's the benefit of using touch based app concepts on an non touch laptop computer?

A new overpriced dongle.

 

[Stella]

I ask because I don't know, do you think Apple could have both chips running on a device and then code in the OS that if "APP" launches, have it launch on the ARM chip, while the OS runs on the Intel side of the shop?

That is absolutely possible.

But - what problem is being solved by allowing iOS apps being run on Mac OS? Developers still need to modify the GUI for a usable Mac OS experience.

iOS apps on a desktop application would no little more than dashboard type apps.


Apple putting in an additional ARM chip into its computers sounds like another excuse to hike prices.

 

[idunn]

And the dumbing down of the mac continues.

This is certainly a possibility given Apple's oft track record of removing advanced features from its software. The trend seems in general to entail lowering the standards of OSX towards iOS, rather than asking iOS to match the once former excellence of Mac software.

There are no doubt many who welcome the ability to use iOS apps on a Mac, with in theory cross platform communication a good thing—particularly if it works as well as envisioned. However it seems many functions designed for an iPad remain best executed there; while some thinking something like an iPad (I'm looking at you, Tim Cook) should serve well enough for anything, save perhaps a Mac Pro.

The increasing inclusion of iOS chips within Macs (iMac Pro, as one example) are perhaps a welcome good idea if providing better security versus another backdoor (Intel ME). As well, including iOS apps could prove more than a novelty and both practical and welcome to an extent on Macs. But that is the upside, the down being another significant step towards the end of the Mac as we've largely known and loved it to date.

Apple customers deserve better. Specifically those customers who may use an iPhone or iPad but are first and foremost Mac loyalists. Those who use Macs for professional need as well for love, in preferring this form of computing. All else aside there is a lot to be said for nothing else but this: that in excellence Macintosh and naught else.