Apple should have brought all Finders capabilities to Files in iPadOS. SMB is great, however I require WebDAV, sFTP, etc for my cloud stored files. Let me guess, this will be incorporated in iPadOS 2.0, way to prolong the inevitable Apple
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.
iPad Apps Are Coming to the Mac With Apple's Project Catalyst
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple should have brought all Finders capabilities to Files in iPadOS. SMB is great, however I require WebDAV, sFTP, etc for my cloud stored files. Let me guess, this will be incorporated in iPadOS 2.0, way to prolong the inevitable Apple
Or an Instagram app for the iPad, instead of blowing up the iPhone version.
Now if only they would make a DC universe gift card to pay for the DC universe app.
Last edited:
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
So, is this anything like Universal Apps in Windows? I vaguely remember there being some derision over this.
I'm not a developer, so from the user perspective I think this could be good, especially if they don't force a dumb down of apps for Mac (which based on the Keynote they aren't).
I guess iOS being based on OSX is finally beginning to fulfill its potential after 12 years.
I'm not a developer, so from the user perspective I think this could be good, especially if they don't force a dumb down of apps for Mac (which based on the Keynote they aren't).
I guess iOS being based on OSX is finally beginning to fulfill its potential after 12 years.
iPadOS, iOS, tvOS are all still "iOS". The difference is what "Idiom" the platform uses: Phone, Pad, or TV. That changes some of the UI behavior. Pad supports split screen, and uses a UISplitView differently than Phone. TV does some things differently as well.
But I can write one app against UIKit and reuse even UI elements between all three platforms, because it is all UIKit.
Catalyst is UIKit for macOS. Nothing more, nothing less. But it looks like macOS is using the Pad idiom.
Yes. Catalyst (UIKit) was private in Mojave, and since Catalina is the first major version with UIKit as a public framework, it will require it.
It is like Universal Apps, but there's a key difference between Apple's approach and Microsoft's. Microsoft built UWP on top of WinRT (edit: the framework, not Windows RT, the SKU) that was part of Win8. These are "Modern" or "Metro" apps. The fact that you had to completely port an app to it to get the benefit made it expensive for established apps like Photoshop. And because of how WinRT worked, you may not even get all the benefit of it since there were some weird issues around WinRT in C++ that I don't know if they resolved in the Win 10 timeframe.
Apple played a longer game. iOS/tvOS/iPadOS and macOS already share a lot of frameworks: Foundation, AVFoundation, Core Data, Core Graphics, Core Animation, Map Kit, etc, etc etc. Before Catalyst, I could still write up an app with a single codebase that compiled for all 4 platforms, mostly. The problem is that AppKit and UIKit are different enough that you have to "fork" a piece of your code for AppKit and one for UIKit. This makes managing things a bit trickier and just more effort. By bringing UIKit to the Mac, what Apple is doing is saying to the (more numerous) iOS devs: "You can now bring your app to the Mac without having to deal with AppKit to do it".
The advantage here is that UIKit is something people already use. iOS has the larger developer base. It's now less of a "semi-port" and now a "tweak it for Mac like you do for tvOS or iPad" situation. That's important.
But, in many ways, because the two have shared most of their core frameworks for years, it was also a lot less work to get here. I think Apple was hoping that only having AppKit/UIKit diverged was enough to entice more devs, but I guess not quite.
Last edited:
then you're following the wrong topic.This is going to allow apps to come to Mac that would not otherwise be on the Mac, because the development houses are not going to devote the resources. But when Xcode can translate an existing universal app with nearly no effort, everyone is going to do it just because they can.
After a while, the majority of iOS apps ( the ones that do not revolve around running around like a manic) will have Mac equivalents.
Think of the utility of this just from the perspective of Notifications. I look forward to seeing many of previously-iOS-only Notifications appearing on Mac while I'm working on it.
Here's a good example: Microsoft To-Do (formerly Wunderlist)... There is an app for iOS, but not macOS... you have to use the webpage version on a Mac, which is bollocks. Microsoft has not given a timeline yet for a Mac app.
With Catalyst, they could release it tomorrow... (well, when everything is updated, of course)
[doublepost=1559686418][/doublepost]
This is probably an obscure reference even for fellow brits, but "you can't have marzipan... marzipan's private!".
Ahem. Catalyst is in interesting name given the next macOS being called Catalina. It's like they want to bring back Cat names after all... ! It's also the name of good Star Wars novel that came out around the time of Rogue One, incidentally.
But anyway. This is a good thing, if it makes it easier to bring iPad apps to the Mac, everyone wins, surely? More apps for the Mac, greater possible sales/users for developers for less work than would have previously taken. I don't see many downsides really.
"You wouldn't let it lie - would you??"
Yay! Apple is making greedy developers give their iPad apps to Mac users for free!
We can't wait until all software is written by High School Script Kiddies like Timmy the Crook says it will. Then, in addition to being free, software will also be worth ZERO!
We can't wait until all software is written by High School Script Kiddies like Timmy the Crook says it will. Then, in addition to being free, software will also be worth ZERO!
It would be nice to do it natively, but as someone else noted, there's not actually an iPad version of IG, it's just the phone version.
That said, if you want to post from your desktop, I know of two workarounds offhand. One is to use the lr/instagram plugin, which runs in Lightroom and works very well (I use it nearly every day). The other option is to use the Developer view in Safari for IG, but personally I find this much more cumbersome.
Is that technically a triple-negative?
Yep. I was going to say that using the web version on an iPad is so much better than a blown up iPhone version that demands portrait mode.
Here's a good example: Microsoft To-Do (formerly Wunderlist)... There is an app for iOS, but not macOS... you have to use the webpage version on a Mac, which is bollocks. Microsoft has not given a timeline yet for a Mac app.
With Catalyst, they could release it tomorrow... (well, when everything is updated, of course)
[doublepost=1559686418][/doublepost]
I just got back from vacation so I was late to the, um, horse-beating party. XD
To be fair, stand pricing aside, I actually think the new hardware is excellent for real pros of course. The Catalyst deal extends some hope to us prosumers, since many developers these days are sinking more time and effort into their mobile apps than desktop software. This has the potential to combine the best of both worlds if embraced.
Just because the barrier to making a Mac app will be lowered is not an excuse to make bad apps.
This is a great way for primarily iOS developers to make a Mac application. Those that care will take the time to turn it into a rich, Mac-like application, and hopefully SwiftUI and the new xcode will enable this. What it means for Mac developers, I'm not sure. Do they have to develop in the brain-dead world of iOS then try to add Mac features? That sounds miserable, no matter how much FUN SwiftUI is.
Not trying to troll you, but something tells me Instagram wants to stay on the phone. The reason I think this is there still isn't a native iPad app.
It drives me crazy that you can't post to Instagram without iOS, but then, I haven't posted since 2018 because I'm over it.
Apple should have brought all Finders capabilities to Files in iPadOS. SMB is great, however I require WebDAV, sFTP, etc for my cloud stored files. Let me guess, this will be incorporated in iPadOS 2.0, way to prolong the inevitable Apple
Let's just keep iOS and iPadOS for people who don't want to use a computer - there's billions out there. The OS is fundamentally flawed for anything else, and you can see Apple's floundering efforts to make it more like a computer, which fail at every turn, BECAUSE the OS isn't capable.
Then bring Mac out of the last century, add touch and pencil support and let Pros (and the rest of us) get on with a modern computer experience. Give us different sized slabs with iMac chins to lay on the desk - from 13" MacBook right up to 27" iMac and beyond - and get on with supporting Mac with 21st Century technologies. Nobody want's to reach out to their Mac screen vertically, lay it on the desk.
Apple can focus all they like on iOS/iPadOS, but make it better, faster, cheaper for ordinary people who just need a device that gets them into the internet and whatever else they need (facebook, instagram, whatsapp, pintrest, twitter, etc) - but editing 4k video, even if the chips are capable of it, is totally unnecessary.
Now that mouse support is present via Assistive Devices, it will only be time before more macOS features and functions make it to iPadOS.
It almost seems that Apple is prolonging OS maturity by diluting the OS categories and introducing things that should have been included a version or two prior within iOS.
How many people were requesting for external thumb drive support, or a file manager, download manager, desktop version websites, etc. These were available via third party apps, and finally we get these natively.
At some point both iPadOS and macOS will meet, and the only difference will be a touch screen with pencil support. May it run on ARM or x64, it seems the OS bag of innovation is being recycled.
Imagine a similar feature to CarPlay, where connect an iPhone or iPad wirelessly to a display via WiDi converted iOS to macOS, similar to SamsungDEX. That my friend would be a game changer. All this is adding features that were missing and borrowed from macOS, next.
No multi-user option either, must be an iOS 14 feature
Now that mouse support is present via Assistive Devices, it will only be time before more macOS features and functions make it to iPadOS.
It almost seems that Apple is prolonging OS maturity by diluting the OS categories and introducing things that should have been included a version or two prior within iOS.
How many people were requesting for external thumb drive support, or a file manager, download manager, desktop version websites, etc. These were available via third party apps, and finally we get these natively.
At some point both iPadOS and macOS will meet, and the only difference will be a touch screen with pencil support. May it run on ARM or x64, it seems the OS bag of innovation is being recycled.
Imagine a similar feature to CarPlay, where connect an iPhone or iPad wirelessly to a display via WiDi converted iOS to macOS, similar to SamsungDEX. That my friend would be a game changer. All this is adding features that were missing and borrowed from macOS, next.
No multi-user option either, must be an iOS 14 feature
Problem is, iOS and iPad OS just aren't up to it. The OS is brain-dead at the core - it's a phone OS after all. I agree this seems to be Apple's thinking - blend iOS with a dumbed down macOS, but the execs running the show just don't seem to have the intellectual understanding. A bit of Jobs - if I say it, you make it happen or else - and the engineers glue another leaky pipe on the side of iOS to satisfy their masters, but ultimately make a joke of iPad as a computer. It can never be - it was designed that way from the beginning. Jobs knew it was for people that don't want a computer, but Cook has lost the plot.
[doublepost=1559695992][/doublepost]
More people need to get over it and we'll have a happier world. Instagram isn't about showcasing your photography, although there's plenty of people who do (even posting from a Mac, but I believe it's a pain), but Instagram is more about finding out about you & your life to sell you advertising - so they keep it to pics of "me at the restaurant", "me at the clothing shop", "me on holiday", etc. and make their money that way, whatever the PR about the service is - that's its purpose.
And the sooner people wake up - the better the world will be.
It’s just a large screen iPhone
Problem is iPad has to mature, the slump is sales was reflective of the OS not being utilized to its full potential. Similar to Android OS phone elements being stretched on its tablets.
Apple understands that if they do not mature or bring more full OS class features and functions the iPad will slump in sales again. They don’t want a repeat of history.
They have separated the OS categories as to diversify revenue streams. Some people may not want to learn a new OS (mac), however are coming from iPhone and want something more productive inclined with a larger screen. iPadOS bridges that requirement.
We may not like it, however I have many elderly clients who have used Windows for a lifetime, however they experience with iPhone and iPad peak their interest to macOS. The learning curve is steep, however if they could do desktop type things on an iPad, these clients would be happy. At present iOS is very limited, iPadOS is improving on this however not fast enough.
Apple is an expert on dragging innovation on the hardware and software side, what do you expect?
All they had to do was port Finders functionality to iPadOS, nope we will get there in 5 years.