Code in macOS Catalina Suggests Apple is Working on Catalyst Versions of Messages and Shortcuts for Mac

[madmin]

In what way is this non-native? The binaries are compiled for x86, and the frameworks are built into the OS, right? Electron is Javascript scum.

I'm amused by this post from someone based in Silicon Valley who talks of Javascript scum when I would've thought Apple would love to have even half the developer community and dynamism that Javascript has. Not to mention the universal appeal of a language that runs the web and is increasingly used for iOS and Android development.

 

[ersan191]

Catalyst is a saboteur. When Apple has replaced its own Mac apps with iPadOS ones, there will be little need to keep the original macOS apps at all, which is going to see a lot of dedicated macOS apps from other developers also disappear.

We are heading to universal apps and laptops that no longer need or use macOS.

Develop once, publish everywhere, don’t bother with macOS development as something better exists.

I can count the number of native Cocoa-based (not command line) apps I use that couldn’t be replaced by an iOS-based version on one hand.

 

[chucker23n1]

Unless Apple brings the name of iMessage to Mac they won't be able to carry all the functionality of the iOS to MacOS. I wonder why they never do that?

Not sure what you mean. The app isn't named iMessage on iOS either.

 

[spazzcat]

iPadOS is just a marketing name. It’s still very much iOS and its first two betas’ build numbers have therefore matched the corresponding iOS 13 betas.

Guessing in iPadOS 14 we will see the codebases start to go in different directions. Forking them is just the first step...

 

[xxray]

Need messages as an option in iCloud to compete against Googles solution!

iMessage is already an option in iCloud.

 

[Supermacguy]

I dont understand why it would need to be "remade" in Catalyst. It's already a first class, Apple produced, desktop app. If it needs feature parity with iOS, give developers the time they need to make it happen.

 

[n-evo]

I really hope this won't destroy the macOS UI on a large scale. Much like how the Home app has that terrible iOS style settings window when you right click an accessory instead of a native macOS solution.

 

[simonmet]

I dont understand why it would need to be "remade" in Catalyst. It's already a first class, Apple produced, desktop app. If it needs feature parity with iOS, give developers the time they need to make it happen.

Yeah I don’t understand what features the Mac app is missing or the benefit in porting from iOS either. But if it’s easier for them to keep the apps in sync with feature parity this way then so be it.

Obviously not all apps should be developed this way and each platform is still quite different. I don’t think Apple is about to give up on dedicated Final Cut or Logic apps for instance, but the Mac Messages app (and numerous others like Contacts, Calendar, Notes etc) already look like iOS apps to me: they’re simple enough.

 

[Janichsan]

The real goodness is in one of his recent blog posts...

https://www.highcaffeinecontent.com...g-an-ARM-iOS-App-to-Intel-macOS-Using-Bitcode

Stuff like

> you can statically translate binaries between Intel and ARM if they include Bitcode. It really works!

and

> Apple could use Bitcode to translate every Bitcode-enabled app on the Mac App Store, without consulting developers, so it would be ready to go on day one. This kind of power means Apple needn’t preannounce an ARM switch a year ahead of time, and also means a technology like Rosetta may be completely unnecessary this time round.

You're somewhat missing a crucial information here (which the author of the original article also only mentions in passing): Bitcode (as it is implemented now) helps to translate binaries from ARM to Intel, not the other way round, and so far is not used in Mac App Store apps at all.
[doublepost=1561037893][/doublepost]

Suddenly the Mac is filled with apps and developers…

…of which optimistically speaking three thirds are superfluous garbage, based on a glimpse in the iOS App Store today.

…paving the way (hopefully) toward ARM Macs.

Once again: Marzipan/Catalyst has absolutely nothing to do with the underlying CPU architecture.

Wow it's so ugly my first glimps just reminded me windows 10

For one, these screenshots represent very incomplete versions of the apps in questions. Secondly, what can be seen from the Catalyst version of Messages in fact looks pretty much identical to the current macOS version of that app. Does that also remind you of Windows 10?

 

[palmerc2]

If this means when I delete a conversation on iOS it also deletes on macOS, I’m in!

 

[jonblatho]

Guessing in iPadOS 14 we will see the codebases start to go in different directions. Forking them is just the first step...

It’s not a “fork.” It’s literally still iOS.

 

[mudflap]

Just hurry up and bring Android support so I can get rid of all my messaging apps.

Why would Apple do that? There is zero money in it.

I think either they should keep the one iPhone killer app — inarguably the best, most secure messaging app available — Apple-only, or charge $5 for the Android version, or require a monthly subscription. As Apple hardware owners we pay a premium. Android owners should have to pitch in too. We shouldn't have to subsidize them — increasing the server load and adding millions and millions of freeloaders to the network WE paid for, while they bash Apple and Apple users every chance they get.

 

[chucker23n1]

Guessing in iPadOS 14 we will see the codebases start to go in different directions. Forking them is just the first step...

Maybe. They might want to ship two significantly different Springboard apps at some point, for example.

 

[dugbug]

Which means that the dedicated macOS apps we have now will rightfully disappear and be replaced. Catalyst is a Trojan horse: it is sneaking in a level of change that most people don’t even realise what is happening. I think the Mac is safe. Most original macOS apps are on death row. Only a few professional apps might remain. Apple can then release ARM laptops for consumers and leave macOS to the people who can afford $20,000 MacPros. Catalyst is all about major change. Within 12-24 months, ARM Macs will be here, running a version of iPadOS. Apple will position Intel Macs for a tiny market share.

so.. catalyst is not an emulation or simulation mode. These are native apps using native macos frameworks. they just ported the common ios frameworks to be available on the mac to deveopers. xcode will, with a checkbox, target uikit apps to the mac. The trick is to respect all the system parameters, etc. within that uikit framework which is all in place now compared to marzipan.

 

[chucker23n1]

Why would Apple do that? There is zero money in it.

I think either they should keep the one iPhone killer app — inarguably the best, most secure messaging app available — Apple-only, or charge $5 for the Android version, or require a monthly subscription.

Maybe they'll require a paid iCloud plan.

It seems like they've determined there's no money in such a service, though.

 

[dugbug]

I dont understand why it would need to be "remade" in Catalyst. It's already a first class, Apple produced, desktop app. If it needs feature parity with iOS, give developers the time they need to make it happen.

WHY would apple want two separate code bases for essentially the same app when they can respect the uniqueness of both platforms in one? WHY would we have two separate teams chasing the same feature list?

 

[123]

No it’s not, not at all. A Catalyst app is just as real a Mac app as any other.

No it isn't. It is a mobile app ported to a completely different environment. The only way this is easier/cheaper to develop than two apps is if you compromise on usability. Because the only reason to write a Catalyst app is to cut costs, this will lead to crappy ports with bad looks and bad UX.

 

[eatrains]

No it isn't. It is a mobile app ported to a completely different environment. The only way this is easier/cheaper to develop than two apps is if you compromise on usability. Because the only reason to write a Catalyst app is to cut costs, this will lead to crappy ports with bad looks and bad UX.

Catalyst does not mean you need to compromise on usability at all.

 

[itsmilo]

If this means when I delete a conversation on iOS it also deletes on macOS, I’m in!

it’s been doing this since icloud messages was released?

 

[rogerm]

What I would really like to see is a Catalyst version of Swift Playgrounds being brought to the Mac. Does anybody know if that might be in the works?

 

[szw-mapple fan]

What is wrong with the current messaging app now in macOS? I use it when I am on my Mac and it more than meets my needs.

It lacks feature parity with iOS iMessage, such as apps and sticker support. It meets most user's needs, but it makes no sense for Apple to maintain two codebases when a better option is available, especially since the messages app on the Mac has a catalyst-like UI anyways.

 

[MiniMoney]

yes, I am not seeing the daily, non-dev use of it either

could anyone share a thought?

Messages on the Mac doesn’t support extensions like it does on iOS. Extensions are the things like stickers, Apple Pay Cash, and third party apps. Of course using Apple Pay Cash on a Mac will require either the user has an Apple Watch or Touch ID on their Mac.

 

[maverick28]

This effectively ushers EOL for Automator.

 

[fairuz]

I'm amused by this post from someone based in Silicon Valley who talks of Javascript scum when I would've thought Apple would love to have even half the developer community and dynamism that Javascript has. Not to mention the universal appeal of a language that runs the web and is increasingly used for iOS and Android development.

Well I don't work at Apple. And btw, I use JS for my own projects, but only in the interest of rapid dev. I really hate Apple's UI frameworks and resort to React Native instead, but it has nothing to do with the language, and Apple could've just made their frameworks make sense like RN does.

JS has a big community. There are downsides, but overall it's a good community. The tech is just bad, and JS apps have noticeably poor performance. Web apps sloppily converted into desktop are also sucky. As in, enough to turn users away. If you want a JS success story, it's Discord. They used React and did everything right. It's still a tad slow, but honestly it's probably this or nothing. The Steam desktop app is a perfect example of trash.

Apple doesn't worry about any of this. They just want quality, and they get it. Their apps run more smoothly even than the Google counterparts.
[doublepost=1561083200][/doublepost]

It lacks feature parity with iOS iMessage, such as apps and sticker support.

And this is a bad thing?
[doublepost=1561083733][/doublepost]

No it isn't. It is a mobile app ported to a completely different environment. The only way this is easier/cheaper to develop than two apps is if you compromise on usability. Because the only reason to write a Catalyst app is to cut costs, this will lead to crappy ports with bad looks and bad UX.

Apps are very flexible wrt screen size nowadays. The biggest differences between the form factors is that Mac apps can have multiple windows and can't have gestures. Not a big deal. I've used iOS apps in the iOS simulator on my Mac, and it's not bad.

 

[chucker23n1]

Apple could've just made their frameworks make sense like RN does.

SwiftUI/Combine is a lot more like RN.

The notion that other frameworks "don't make sense" is rather silly, though.