I know that some Apps only run on the iphone (games, etc). However what about OmniFocus? It would make sense that this App would be run on your computer as well so that goals set could be seen on your computer and sync'd with the iphone. But does it? Do any apps run separate of itunes and sync with the iphone?
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.
Do Apps run on your computer in addition to the iphone?
- Thread starter Karma
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You do realize that programming for the iPhone isn't exactly the same as for Leopard, right? Why would you get two programs for the price of one?
It doesn't make sense to only see them on the iPhone. Some programs should at least be accessible through iTunes. Budget, Loan Calc, Shopping List, TripLog, GoLearn Fitness, My Life Record, etc all should be able to be run on the computer that sync'd with the iPhone.
iTunes already runs on the computer & the iPhone, and it has Contacts, et al. Why not these other programs that you also purchase through the same program? They would run exactly the same way.
Complete different CPU's. The iPhone understands ARM machine code. Newer Mac and Windows understand Intel x82/ia32 code. Older Macs understand PPC or 68k machine code. The oldest original Macintosh prototype was 6809 based. "Fat" or Universal apps can contain code for multiple CPU types, but there's no SDK to package those for the iPhone App Store (yet...).
Exactly. This is retarded. Since I can't access any of the info on the apps from the phone while it's connected to my PC (or mac), I'm pretty sure I'm going to just buy a Palm.
That sucks.
Yeah, he was being reeeeally sarcastic. You should look up what SolidWorks is. Have fun with the Palm though! I hear they're great.
Yeah, when you can write code that can be addressed by X86 and ARM, let us know. Until then, you're asking for the impossible and getting mad about it.
i don't think you realize how crazy this demand is. aside from the fact that the software is PHYSICALLY not compatible, let's think about this from a logical standpoint. you download and install the free AIM client. you download and install the flashlight application. you download and install that race car game where you control the dude using the accelerometer.
awesome. now why the hell would you want to use any of those applications on your computer? your computer has an aim client, your monitor makes a much better flashlight than your phone without a special application to do so and i don't think you want to be tossing around your computer to make some little guy on a motorcycle turn corners.
you're whole idea is silly, it makes no sense. this is why no one has spent the amount of time to basically write these applications over to work in the way that you want them to
Contacts is viewable through iTunes, would you not want that accessible through your computer?
Calendar is viewable through iTunes, would you not want that accessible through your computer?
Apple wrote the code for iTunes. iTunes already transfers settings, files, and code between X86 and ARM. Many of the iPhone access and settings are also already set in the X86 code and in ARM. It's something all of you already take for granted. It works already fine on both the iPhone & a computer. What's the problem understanding that?
If it's just because it's hard, fine. I can understand that.
If it's just because someone hasn't gotten around to it. Fine. I can understand that.
If its because Apple doesn't want it to happen (which none of you would know anyway), I can understand it, though it'd be a dumb decision depending on the situation.
But since it's already been done, and people are already using that process, the question remains valid.
Although the question could be changed to: What's keeping a developer from doing what Apple has done, and have information that's appropriate to the application accessible through the computer?
Calendar is viewable through iTunes, would you not want that accessible through your computer?
Apple wrote the code for iTunes. iTunes already transfers settings, files, and code between X86 and ARM. Many of the iPhone access and settings are also already set in the X86 code and in ARM. It's something all of you already take for granted. It works already fine on both the iPhone & a computer. What's the problem understanding that?
If it's just because it's hard, fine. I can understand that.
If it's just because someone hasn't gotten around to it. Fine. I can understand that.
If its because Apple doesn't want it to happen (which none of you would know anyway), I can understand it, though it'd be a dumb decision depending on the situation.
But since it's already been done, and people are already using that process, the question remains valid.
Although the question could be changed to: What's keeping a developer from doing what Apple has done, and have information that's appropriate to the application accessible through the computer?
1. iTunes cannot "become" an iPhone or iPod touch by "running" the .ipsw files that it moves (not uses) to your devices.
2. The other files that get moved from one to the other are .mp3, .jpg, and the video formats that have become standardized across all platforms.
3. We already have iPhonesque apps on OS X. They're called widgets. Why in the world would you want to run underfeatured, underpowered iPhone apps on a computer?
no no no no no no no
you're machine is running itunes on an x86 or a ppc processor. itunes is written for this type of architecture.
your iphone has a service running on it (written in ARM) which allows itunes (running on x86/ppc) to see the phone and interact with it.
itunes does NOT run on your phone, it's a specific ARM app written by apple to run on the phone, in no way shape or form is this itunes.
your itunes makes modifications on the phone (ie pushes music on it, pushes contacts onto it, modifies config files, etc)
itunes doesn't execute any code on the iphone. itunes is not capable of executing and code on the phone, itunes will not run on ARM arch at all, this is like saying "why won't this *.exe execute on my mac pro?? i don't get it?"
itunes modifying files on an ARM device does not mean it will run on arm architecture by any means
your mac can interact with other OSes and file systems, and modify files but that doesn't mean it can execute them
this is why you are sounding silly, have you ever written code before?
you would need a two sided app
one on the phone, one on the computer
seeing as the app store only installs ARM apps onto the phone this is not possible without downloading a second piece of software from the manufacturer
whether or not they wish to supply something like that is up to them obviously
Karma, you need to understand the difference between DATA and CODE.
Data can be transferred between Mac, PC, mainframe, Linux, AS400, etc. Text files, phone numbers, transaction records, etc. etc. can be transferred without issue for the most part.
Code is bits just like data, but it's instructions to the CPU to do things. Add these two numbers. Branch to this location. Etc etc. This stuff CANNOT be run on dissimilar platforms. There are two issues. First, compare an Intel x86 CPU to a ARM CPU and the instructions telling them to do things are completely different. Use code meant for one on the other, and it'll crash. Hard. Immediately. The second issue is that even when on the same platform (x86 for example), the operating systems could be so different (OSX vs Vista vs Linux) that even if the CPU knows what to do with the instructions, what it ends up doing is nonsensical to the OS and it all crashes down again.
So to sum up - yeah, you can transfer your friend's phone numbers back and forth, that's easy. But the program to do anything with that would have to be specifically written and compiled for the different platforms. One COULD port an application from one platform to another (that's how we can get the "same" games on both PS3 and Xbox, for example) but it's not easy or quick.
Working through a virtualization layer like Flash helps some - you write flash code that is then interpreted by a platform-specific client - but that comes at the cost of performance.
It CAN be done, but only with a heck of a lot of effort that's frankly not worth the reward.
Data can be transferred between Mac, PC, mainframe, Linux, AS400, etc. Text files, phone numbers, transaction records, etc. etc. can be transferred without issue for the most part.
Code is bits just like data, but it's instructions to the CPU to do things. Add these two numbers. Branch to this location. Etc etc. This stuff CANNOT be run on dissimilar platforms. There are two issues. First, compare an Intel x86 CPU to a ARM CPU and the instructions telling them to do things are completely different. Use code meant for one on the other, and it'll crash. Hard. Immediately. The second issue is that even when on the same platform (x86 for example), the operating systems could be so different (OSX vs Vista vs Linux) that even if the CPU knows what to do with the instructions, what it ends up doing is nonsensical to the OS and it all crashes down again.
So to sum up - yeah, you can transfer your friend's phone numbers back and forth, that's easy. But the program to do anything with that would have to be specifically written and compiled for the different platforms. One COULD port an application from one platform to another (that's how we can get the "same" games on both PS3 and Xbox, for example) but it's not easy or quick.
Working through a virtualization layer like Flash helps some - you write flash code that is then interpreted by a platform-specific client - but that comes at the cost of performance.
It CAN be done, but only with a heck of a lot of effort that's frankly not worth the reward.
I think you might be misunderstanding.
iTunes for your computer and iTunes on the iPhone are two different applications. Yes, they share data (music, etc), and they're known by the same name, but that's it.
Why are you guys making a fool out of him? Maybe he worded the title a little bit oddly but it's obvious that he's talking about having a desktop application and an iPhone application and having them sync together. For example, Application X for Leopard and Application X iPhone edition for iPhone that syncs with the Leopard application. To respond to the question, this is something a lot of developers are working on. I got an email today from Cultured Code saying their iPhone version of Things will sync with the desktop version of Things sometime in the near future.
http://www.culturedcode.com/things/ So totally doable. Not sure why the Omni application doesn't have that, would make sense.
http://www.culturedcode.com/things/ So totally doable. Not sure why the Omni application doesn't have that, would make sense.
Thank you for your help, wronski. This was exactly what I was talking about. So Apple isn't holding back the developers, and that my worry is in fact already being worked on.
I'm working on my second degree in I.S., so I knew it could be done. However I was not sure if there were some internal politics that was keeping Apple from letting developers from doing it (i.e. Flash).
Today's news that Apple is relaxing it's app policies is good news to hear. Although I'm beginning to find out how fast some peoples' moods change to reflect what was once impossible can now be done; it's like being in middle school again.
Ever heard of the iPhone Simulator, morons? Way to act technical and be a jerk to a guy to had a reasonable question. Personally, I'd love it if my iPhone Simulator hooked up to iTunes and sync'd apps across. Sorta like my music and my iPod(s).
FlightControl, Fieldrunners, NFL 2010, Crash Kart, HoldEm. I can think of a dozen or so apps I'd love to try on my laptop. It is possible, geniuses.
Very simple, so that developers can develop once and it will work for both iPhone and Mac. There are a lot of applications only have iPhone version, simply because the developer is too busy to develop a Mac version or the developer doesn't think Mac platform is popular enough to invest into.
The iPhone Simulator still requires the code to be compiled for x86. It is not an ARM simulator.
Ultimately there is no technical reason why Apple couldn't allow for "Universal" iPhone app binaries that run on both the phone and Mac via a simulator or whatever, but there are obvious reasons why they won't be doing that. One is that the user experiences of iPhone apps do not translate well to mouse clicking (how do you "touch" two places on the screen at once with a mouse?). The other reason is of course that they want people to buy iPhones & iPods.
As others have pointed out, iTunes does not magically transform itself from iPhone mode to desktop mode; there are just two different iTunes applications- one for the desktop and one for the phone. Nothing is stopping any developer from doing this already (and many do, e.g. Omni Focus, Things, etc.).