Best to market (in theory) for Apple, not first to market. Think Zune vs. iPod.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Still Expected to Allow iPhone and iPad Apps to Run on Macs Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Best to market (in theory) for Apple, not first to market. Think Zune vs. iPod.
Many times in the past I have speculated on the progression of the Mac into the closed ecosystem of iOS. This is one step towards that. Once the iPad apps are running on the Mac and are accepted by the users of Macs, the Mac App Store will start to be phased out. If there's a version of an app in the Mac App Store and the iOS App Store, Apple will direct the user to the iOS version. At the same time they will continue their lockout of the "untrusted" apps - those that are available from outside of the app stores, and those that have not been blessed by Tim (i.e., unknown developers)
Eventually, the only way to get an app on the Mac is to use the iPad app. When that happens, there will be no technical need to have two operating systems (iOS and macOS) so iOS become the new macOS. Note that it will still be called macOS, but it will just be a modified version of iOS (as seen on the Apple Watch, Apple TV, that stupid speaker).
Oh, and you'll have to pay $100 a year to be able to run your own apps on your computer, but they will give you a free 7 day license if you can't afford the $100. (Don't laugh, this is acceptable in the iOS world).
I wonder what the big software companies will do to try to prevent the spread of the open systems that will spring up? Perhaps hardware level signing of the ring-0 code be required.
Fun times ahead.
Eventually, the only way to get an app on the Mac is to use the iPad app. When that happens, there will be no technical need to have two operating systems (iOS and macOS) so iOS become the new macOS. Note that it will still be called macOS, but it will just be a modified version of iOS (as seen on the Apple Watch, Apple TV, that stupid speaker).
Oh, and you'll have to pay $100 a year to be able to run your own apps on your computer, but they will give you a free 7 day license if you can't afford the $100. (Don't laugh, this is acceptable in the iOS world).
I wonder what the big software companies will do to try to prevent the spread of the open systems that will spring up? Perhaps hardware level signing of the ring-0 code be required.
Fun times ahead.
Last edited:
This has probably been in the works quietly for at least the past several years. Major, definitely. Sudden bug ridden effects on macOS? Possibly, but not as bad as what you might think.
That is a great question and one that I do not have an answer for. My first question to that would be just like yours, what problem is being solved? Unless they are thinking the App would run natively versus running in an emulator? But that is not what this article is alluding to.
I was expecting this would happen and see it as the logical transition for Apple to shift to selling the MacPad Pro 
I honestly think this is a nonsense move by Apple.
Why would anyone want to purchase a Mac and then use a Smartphone platform on it?
- Apps ... developers will just get lazy and create ONLY iOS apps and expect users to run apps on iPhone, iPad or the Mac.
- When this reaches a high point for Apple to brag about it ... there goes the real use of a desktop platform altogether. Apps, although great on iOS are not nearly as powerful on macOS/OSX.
I dont' see the value in this one bit. Whooptie do we'll be able to run a smartphone app on the desktop OS.
I recall something just as silly only a few short years ago and it destroyed their hardware business entirely.
BlackBerry
OS = BB10 had some great promise yet delivered to developers improperly along with no backing of their strength business clients: Banking & Finance, Retail, etc.
A former Microsoft software executive was hired (not unlike a former business exec to be hired by Nokia) to help with Software engineering and evengelizing the BB10 system.
This former exec of Microsoft billed to Android developers to: Just run your Android app into a porting utility and "boom" it'll run on any BB10 device. After so many hiccups issues between model to model and resolution layouts (landscape Keyboard based Q10/Passport vs portrait devices Z10/Z30/Leap) and about 2yrs of him using FourSquare to show off where in the world he's Eating/Drinking like a jackass ... BlackBerry was slow with OS updates. Finally somewhat working BlackBerry goes to Amazon to have their junk Android apps in a store preloaded in BB10.2 and so many CrackBerry.com forum posts on how to sideload or installl GooglePlay apps that don't use Google Services (which was an exponentially growing trend) ...
BlackBerry chooses to build Android OS Phones
BlackBerry delays future updates for BB10 (their In-House mobile OS),
BlackBerry doesn't hit their sales margins, marketshare targets or anything at all,
Blackberry sells the rights to use their brandname and partners with 2 manufactures to make Blackberry phones while they exit the smartphone hardware business.
Not saying Apple's iOS will die, far from it ... but it's just dumb, from what I can see to import or run iOS apps on an OSX computer (MacBook, MackBook Air, Mac Mini, iMac, iMac Pro, Mac Pro).
[doublepost=1517438001][/doublepost]
What? You mean as apposed to actually just going to the Udemy site via Safari browser and loggin in to access your courses and content therein? There is nothing beneficial to this other than transfering over saved content like your logon credentials. Everything else is managed at the website service.
THIS! This is what I fear ... a dumbed down computing operating system!
I'd be on the other side of the fence about how we use a file browser system (iOS vs traditional file browsers) but this is just dumb to run iOS apps onto MacOS/OSX systems.
I had a hunch yesterday's news from Ina Freid was more leading to something like this! Pure nonsense Apple.
How would the normal everyday computer users and students ACTUALLY see this, use this as a benefit to run a smartphone OS on OSX (MacBook/MacBook Air/MacBook Pro/iMac)?!
THIS! Well said!!
That's what I'm saying?! Just point me to the person so I can shove my 540lb Leg Pressing FEET up their butt to wake them up from this pipe dream!
I'd rather iOS mature into a more powerful OS then the cripple OSX or macOS into a dumb iOS terminal!!
This smells like Frederighi all over.
Scott where are you man ... where ARE YOU?!
Employee #8 ... how can you let this happen man ... Jobs loved you, groomed you to be the elite programmer, did you fight to keep Forstall around? How can you let OSX die like this, how?!
I think this is a positive step since the Mac App Store like the Apple TV store leaves a lot to be desired. With the exception of a dozen or so essential programs, it's really only good for updating the OS and 1st party software. OTOH the iOS App Store has great new apps every single week. I don't see them crippling MacOS but no one can deny the platform has been stagnant for a while now. IMO the last truly revolutionary and exciting OS X releases were Leopard and Snow Leopard. They were game changers that made OS X the clearly superior OS and coincided with increasing rates of Mac adoption. Before that I would see some people with MacBooks, but around that time it seemed like everyone had a MacBook.
A lot has happened since then. Many folks no longer have the need for a conventional computer especially if they are no longer in school and if their job has nothing to do with using a computer. For a large chunk of the population their primary computing device is their smartphone followed by a tablet. It handles all of the basic computing needs. The only reason to have a computer is to get real work done, whether programming, video editing, recording audio, engineering, or for most to use an Office suite with a real keyboard and mouse/trackpad.
A lot has happened since then. Many folks no longer have the need for a conventional computer especially if they are no longer in school and if their job has nothing to do with using a computer. For a large chunk of the population their primary computing device is their smartphone followed by a tablet. It handles all of the basic computing needs. The only reason to have a computer is to get real work done, whether programming, video editing, recording audio, engineering, or for most to use an Office suite with a real keyboard and mouse/trackpad.
This has been tried before, and failed miserably. However, Apple is in a good position to succeed in this area.
Windows failed because there were literally no Windows Mobile users and fewer Apps/developers. Tough to get people on board when nobody’s using your mobile OS.
Google is going to fail as well. Running Android Apps in a browser-pretending-to-be-an-OS? What’s the point? The idea of iOS to Mac or Windows Mobile to Windows Desktop is to have Apps that can run on your mobile device or your full-blown desktop OS. Going from Android to Chrome seems like a lateral move - from one limited OS to another.
Apple has a huge advantage because of the developer community for iOS. I highly doubt that this will result in the “dumbing down” of Macs. I think we’ll see useful Apps on iOS end up on the Mac (some might just be complex widgets) along with seeing more complex software make it from the Mac to iOS devices. I don’t expect (or want to) run iOS versions of something like Office on my Mac. But I have lots of utility Apps on iOS that would be nice to have available on my Mac as well.
[doublepost=1517443648][/doublepost]
You never heard of App thinning?
Windows failed because there were literally no Windows Mobile users and fewer Apps/developers. Tough to get people on board when nobody’s using your mobile OS.
Google is going to fail as well. Running Android Apps in a browser-pretending-to-be-an-OS? What’s the point? The idea of iOS to Mac or Windows Mobile to Windows Desktop is to have Apps that can run on your mobile device or your full-blown desktop OS. Going from Android to Chrome seems like a lateral move - from one limited OS to another.
Apple has a huge advantage because of the developer community for iOS. I highly doubt that this will result in the “dumbing down” of Macs. I think we’ll see useful Apps on iOS end up on the Mac (some might just be complex widgets) along with seeing more complex software make it from the Mac to iOS devices. I don’t expect (or want to) run iOS versions of something like Office on my Mac. But I have lots of utility Apps on iOS that would be nice to have available on my Mac as well.
[doublepost=1517443648][/doublepost]
You never heard of App thinning?
Last edited:
The developer complaints towards the Mac AppStore are well known. The sorry state of the Mac AppStore is down to Apple being too restrictive. Look outside the Mac App Store and you'll find a lot of great applications - but they will never be allowed on the Mac App Store as the rules stand.
Allowing iOS apps to run on Mac OS will not change a thing. iOS are often cut down versions of the desktop counterpart or one trick ponys. There maybe a lot of apps on the iOS AppStore - but that doesn't mean quality - there's a ton of **** on there.
Just how will this improve things for Mac OS?
The answer is: It won't.
Allowing iOS apps to run on Mac OS will not change a thing. iOS are often cut down versions of the desktop counterpart or one trick ponys. There maybe a lot of apps on the iOS AppStore - but that doesn't mean quality - there's a ton of **** on there.
Just how will this improve things for Mac OS?
The answer is: It won't.
I have to ask as Stella did ... what solution does this REALLY solve?
Moving a limited app from a limited OS to a more powerful OS ... the app is yet still limited.
Sure XCode allows for 1 app to be created and supposedly ported to another platform yet there is a lot more involved, I'm guessing. Still from this news articles it's suggesting iOS apps to run on OSX natively just the same ol' iOS applications. There isnt' talk of any difference so the question(s):
What does this solve?
What's the point?
What's to gain running a smartphone OS and apps on a desktop OS when the desktop OS and desktop computers don't have their own cellular network connection ... what's the point?
Savvy?
easy on developers...
It would probably break the Apple fence, allowing this, and users could now question "Why do I need an iPad when i can run these same apps on a Mac? "
There was an inventive for getting these devices tor specific purposes like running iOS apps "because" you couldn't run them on a Mac.. but if that will no longer be needed, then sales will be lost.
I can't see Apple opening up the "limitations" the app currently providers, just because it now runs on a much open platform. *if* they security is front-most. But perhaps it would be more of a "bridging-the-gap"
It would probably break the Apple fence, allowing this, and users could now question "Why do I need an iPad when i can run these same apps on a Mac? "
There was an inventive for getting these devices tor specific purposes like running iOS apps "because" you couldn't run them on a Mac.. but if that will no longer be needed, then sales will be lost.
I can't see Apple opening up the "limitations" the app currently providers, just because it now runs on a much open platform. *if* they security is front-most. But perhaps it would be more of a "bridging-the-gap"
Last edited:
If you ever used Chromebook, you will know how it will works. Currently Android App runs on Chromebook with small window which emulating your phone screen. You can resize the app if you want.
This is probably how it will be done.
Apple is basically following the footstep of Microsoft and Google.
Some don’t. But Macs are more profitable than iPads, so if those iPhone users buy MacBooks instead of iPads to run their daily apps with a larger display and keyboard, it just adds to Apple’s bottom line.
While multiple reports suggest Apple has decided to place a greater focus on improving the performance and security of iOS and macOS, which will delay some new features until next year, it appears the company still aims to introduce the ability for Macs to run iPhone and iPad apps later this year.
Mark Gurman and Ina Fried, reporting for Bloomberg News and Axios respectively, both claim the framework for combined apps remains on Apple's software roadmap for 2018, despite some planned iOS 12 features likely being pushed back to 2019, including a new home screen with a redesigned grid of app icons.
Apple's software engineering chief Craig Federighi reportedly revealed the plans during a meeting with employees earlier this month.
Last month, Gurman reported that developers will be able to design a single third-party app that works with both a touchscreen, and a mouse or trackpad, depending on whether it's running on an iPhone, iPad, or Mac. Apple would presumably also streamline its own apps on the desktop and mobile.
The report didn't explain how all of this will work, but Apple could be planning to release a new SDK with new APIs that enable true cross-platform functionality. Right now, Apple's UIKit and AppKit frameworks provide the required infrastructure for iOS and macOS app user interfaces respectively.
It's worth noting that Apple already has a private framework called UXKit, used for the Photos app on Mac. In 2015, Jason Snell said UXKit "sits above the Mac's familiar AppKit frameworks and strongly resembles UIKit on iOS."
Apple tentatively plans to begin rolling out the change in iOS 12 and macOS 10.14, so there will likely be an announcement at WWDC 2018 around June. Following a few months of beta testing, major new versions of iOS and macOS are typically publicly released in September and October respectively.
The project is reportedly codenamed "Marzipan" within Apple. Gurman speculated that universal apps would make it easier for Apple to one day create a single operating system for all of its devices, should it ever go down that avenue. At the very least, it could bring some renewed attention to Mac apps.
Apple would be following in the footsteps of Microsoft's Universal Windows Platform, aimed at helping developers create universal apps that run across Windows 10 and Windows 10 Mobile, the latter of which is being phased out.
Article Link: Apple Still Expected to Allow iPhone and iPad Apps to Run on Macs Later This Year
Woohoo, watered down touch based computer programs on a computer without a touch screen!!! Looking forward to it.
Apple has been running iOS apps in a Mac window since 2008. They just named their window manager the Simulator, and kept iOS apps that can use that window manager (built with native x86 slices) out of their App Store. But developers have been building and running them for a decade.
Microsoft already addressed that question by making the Surface Studio desktop with an adjustable touchscreen that angles down very low to the desk, like a drafting table or Wacom tablet. Did you honestly not know about new form factors such as this, or did you purposely choose to ignore it? And Phil should not be one to criticize "lowest common denominator thinking" when Apple is busy stripping functionality from their current Mac apps in an attempt to make them resemble the iOS versions.
Last edited:
Not an example as iMessage and Airdrop works perfectly for me and others every time I need
[doublepost=1517468027][/doublepost]though how much I love this idea (as I hate ElectronJS app), I don't see this approach really can bring any special from Mobile platforms:
- Push Notifications: most iOS app uses APNS, which made them super-fast and reliable, but Chrome web-notification feature is decent.
- Mail: why do I have to open Mail app to fetch new mail anyway?
- Access to Photos on desktop: who needs it anyway ?
- Spotlight: CoreSpotlight has been available since last year
- Google apps work better offline: Yes, I need this, but why would Google do it anyway?
...
I think this project Marzipan only helps Apple maintains their Mac apps faster in the future
Honest question, why would I care about Microsoft and what they are doing? And how is it related specifically to my regarding Phil Schiller? At no point was my discussion with that other member about Microsoft. Respectfully, I could care less about Microsoft/Wacom. I was simply speaking to white Phil Schillers statement regarding their disbelief for a touch screen on a Mac. Nothing further.
See, I think this second half of your quote shows exactly that you're anti-Apple and you're trying to refute Apple/my statement because of your own approval for Microsoft. Phil Schiller can criticize the competition if he wants. Your definition of Apple "Stripping down functionality" is in contrary to everybody else's uses either. That would be your own opinion.
Guys, when I said "performance", I wasn't thinking about speed or power, but I actually meant "feature" compromises, such as when iTunes11 replaced iTunes10. I'm well aware today's iPhones run on a 64 bit platform with very capable Arm processors, so perhaps my incorrect choice of words led to confusion. Mea Culpa.....
However, I continue to suspect accelerated integration will somehow down the line lead to compromises that would not be necessary with dedicated Apps. That's not to say I don't understand why Universal, multi-platform Apps would be desirable from Apple's (and eventually the developer's) point of view.
I reiterate that the PPC to Intel x86 transition worked because there was a big speed increase in in the underlying architecture - I don't see that for the x86 to ARM (more power efficient perhaps, but not a factor x2 in speed!)
"what we have on the Mac will be replaced by dumbed down versions of whatever the developer currently offers"
Well, if they follow what Apple does & pushes then yes. For the developers - they would rather just support a new A-series MacBook as: AMBP == iPad + keyboard, i.e. just add some keyboard paradigm in lieu of thouchscreen to a iPad app...
But that's just how *I* see the industry developing. But there are clear signs from Apple that that's what they want - they don't want to make PCs: drop of Aperture, Final Cut simplification, drop of professional audio tools, Mac Pro situation for the past decade, pushing Touch Bar on the MBP, high prices of the MBP, "what's a computer" iPad adds, making the iPad "Pro" etc etc - It sucks for me, but ok, when it finally comes to that I'm glad that I try to keep my workflow platform agnostic (LibreOffice, Firefox etc)
As an iOS developer I'd like that. The Mac market share isn't that big, so I'm not interested in it if that means rewriting an app from scratch, but if I can port my iOS app on the Mac for free or with limited effort it is a good news.
I wonder how they'll handle communication with the OS, maybe it will be like running an app in the simulator so as far as the app is concerned everything looks the same, but if you know where to look for you can have access to its portion of the file system (super handy while debugging). And speaking of the simulator there are certain things you can't do, like sending an email, so they need to find a way to allow you to use all the functionalities you have on iOS.
I wonder how they'll handle communication with the OS, maybe it will be like running an app in the simulator so as far as the app is concerned everything looks the same, but if you know where to look for you can have access to its portion of the file system (super handy while debugging). And speaking of the simulator there are certain things you can't do, like sending an email, so they need to find a way to allow you to use all the functionalities you have on iOS.