Apple to combine macOS and iOS applications next year

[DrMacintosh]

Quote

Starting as early as next year, software developers will be able to design a single application that works with a touchscreen or mouse and trackpad depending on whether it’s running on the iPhone and iPad operating system or on Mac 

 

Quote

Unifying the apps could help the iOS and macOS platforms “evolve and grow as one, and not one at the expense of the other,” says Steven Troughton-Smith

 

Quote

This would be the biggest change to Apple’s software platform since iOS was introduced.

 

As that last post put it, this would be a massive change and would really elevate macOS well above Windows 10 in my opinion seeing as iOS has access to the best App store in existence. What I fear though is that developers will not make their apps for the Mac regardless of how many APIs Apple throws at developers unless its as easy and as cheap as flipping a switch. 

 

Lets be real, the Mac App Store is pretty barren. One of its featured games is still FireWatch......(no shade on FireWatch btw, seriously play it if you haven't) so having the potential to have the iOS App Store at least partially on the Mac would be a game changer and would give people in the Apple ecosystem even more reasons to buy Macs rather than having to go so low as to buy a Windows PC  

 

Thankfully Apple does have far influence to make this idea work, unlike Windows with UWP apps since Windows Phone is factually dead. 

 

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-20/apple-is-said-to-have-plan-to-combine-iphone-ipad-and-mac-apps

 

[Creed1]

With them doing this, it would be nice to have a Macbook Pro 2 in 1. They are thin compared to other 2 in 1's, plus an iPad and a Macbook Pro together would be awesome. I don't have many apple products, but this would be nice imo. 

[Drak3]

So, basically, copy Microsoft, fail, and for the same reason.

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, Drak3 said:

So, basically, copy Microsoft, fail, and for the same reason.

Well MS never really had anything going for it in the first place.....

 

The difference is that the iPhone has market presence and Windows phone did not. Otherwise UWP would have succeeded. 

[AlTech]

The biggest thing personally stopping me from developing mac apps is how expensive a Mac is in the first place (also $100 USD per year is a terrible joke).

[captain_to_fire]

30 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

So, basically, copy Microsoft, fail, and for the same reason.

Apple has a history of taking stuff that crashed and burned and make it a hit. Remember the Microsoft Tablet PC in 2001 that no one cared about? Then Microsoft tried that with Windows 7 (e.g. Asus Eee Slate EP121 and Toshiba Libretto W100) that has Touch features but lacks proper touch optimized interface and apps. Then Apple surprised everyone with the iPad in 2010. I confess that I was one of the haters of the first iPad given that no one cares about tablets and that only rich people will buy it but I was wrong. 

 

Then Microsoft tried to respond by releasing Windows 8 and its redacted form Windows RT which is a poorly executed attempt to dominate tablets because Windows 8/RT is much more difficult to use than iOS and Android and it lacks apps. Even to this day, there are more apps for the iPad alone than it is in the Windows Store and iOS apps are better than their UWP counterparts. Ever tried UWP Netflix? It’s terrible and slow. 

Edited December 21, 2017 by hey_yo_

[Guest lilbman]

20 minutes ago, CmzPlusHardware said:

With them doing this, it would be nice to have a Macbook Pro 2 in 1. They are thin compared to other 2 in 1's, plus an iPad and a Macbook Pro together would be awesome. I don't have many apple products, but this would be nice imo. 

It would be nice for use in the wintertime.  Macbooks don't have the greatest thermal capabilities, so it could heat your legs even if you're doing something as menial as surfing the web.

 

satire or truth?

[Streetguru]

Man who wants to play a walking simulator?

So it appears then that apple won't be moving to Ryzen most likely, will be trying to push ARM on everything, doubt this will end well.

[Guest lilbman]

1 minute ago, Streetguru said:

Man who wants to play a walking simulator?

So it appears then that apple won't be moving to Ryzen most likely, will be trying to push ARM on everything, doubt this will end well.

I wouldn't be surprised if they came out with a really thin Macbook with an ARM processor.

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, Streetguru said:

will be trying to push ARM on everything,

This story does not mean Apple is going ARM. 

[captain_to_fire]

Just now, Streetguru said:

Man who wants to play a walking simulator?

So it appears then that apple won't be moving to Ryzen most likely, will be trying to push ARM on everything, doubt this will end well.

I don’t think Apple will be using AMD CPU’s anytime soon because their pro applications like Final Cut Pro X is using Intel’s Quick Sync core and there’s no TB3 in Ryzen just yet although Intel is planning to open source Thunderbolt just like USB. 

[DrMacintosh]

12 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

also $100 USD per year is a terrible joke).

But it helps keep out the people who just want to upload an app and never update it. 

 

$100 USD sounds pretty reasonable to me. 

[Streetguru]

Just now, DrMacintosh said:

This story does not mean Apple is going ARM. 

That seems to be the way they want to go though, I mean how many people actually need high end hardware in a mac? Final Cut Pro? What else?

The laptops could easily replace intel with ARM soon as iOS/macOS are combined.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

This story does not mean Apple is going ARM. 

So Apple A series Chips for iPhones and iPads and x86-64 for Macs? lol. Not too sure that's their masterplan tbh.

[Evelyn Harthbrooke]

14 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

The biggest thing personally stopping me from developing mac apps is how expensive a Mac is in the first place (also $100 USD per year is a terrible joke).

The $99 per year isn't just for macOS development. It allows to you make apps for both macOS and iOS, as well as create Safari Extensions and then publish them in the App Stores or the Safari Extension Store (or whatever its called). So I mean, it isn't really a joke. Also it prevents a fair few people who don't have the $99 per year required from publishing scam/spam apps in the App Store. Doesn't prevent all bad guys from doing it, but it stops a fair few.

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

Not too sure that's their masterplan tbh.

Its what they are doing now. 

 

They might make ARM Macs but ARM Macs will never be the center of their product line. They can emulate the iOS apps already, they just want to let developers do that easily. 

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, KamranMackey said:

 

Oh praise be to apple, thank you for giving developers the privilege of making programs for your ecosystem!

It really is a silly system, not sure how it ever took off to begin with.

[Streetguru]

Just now, DrMacintosh said:

 

Apple makes more money if they cut out intel/radeon from the equation

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, Streetguru said:

Apple makes more money if they cut out intel/radeon from the equation

But then their computers aren't good for anything and they don't ship any units........

 

So no, Apple is not going to be focusing on ARM for the Macs. 

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

 

All they need to do is port their existing software to ARM, and then people will buy it because it's apple and it "just works"

[Evelyn Harthbrooke]

3 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

Oh praise be to apple, thank you for giving developers the privilege of making programs for your ecosystem!

It really is a silly system, not sure how it ever took off to begin with.

I think you broke your quotes, as they have no content inside of them. Also, what silly system? The fact you have to pay to publish stuff in the App Stores/Safari Extension Gallery? I don't think it's silly. I think it's smart. Also, Google also makes you pay a fee to publish apps on Google Play, so Apple isn't the only one.

[AlTech]

3 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

But it helps keep out the people who just want to upload an app and never update it. 

Well yeah, but the amount of money itself is an issue

 

Also recurring spending == no.

 

Apple is literally the only publishing distribution platform with a subscription. Every other platform is one time payment and it's worked out fine for them.

 

Last week over 20 apps on my OP3 got updates. So clearly it's just an excuse for Apple to keep milking their devs.

Quote

$100 USD sounds pretty reasonable to me. 

Yeah, as a one time payment. Not as a yearly sub.

 

Let's be honest. Unless a dev made a paid for app (which mobile users are sensitive to for some unknown reason) they won't recoup that fee.

3 minutes ago, KamranMackey said:

The $99 per year isn't just for macOS development.

I know. It used to be that it was $100/year for Mac and a $100/year for IOS before they merged them together.

Quote

It allows to you make apps for both macOS and iOS, as well as create Safari Extensions and then publish them in the App Stores or the Safari Extension Store (or whatever its called). So I mean, it isn't really a joke. Also it prevents a fair few people who don't have the $99 per year required from publishing scam/spam apps in the App Store. Doesn't prevent all bad guys from doing it, but it stops a fair few.

So people who don't want to throw away money = bad people? wow...... just wow.......

2 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

Apple makes more money if they cut out intel/radeon from the equation

Apple has a special deal with AMD to get cheaper GPUs than what Nvidia is charging so that's primarily why they've been sticking to AMD dGPUs since 2015.

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, Streetguru said:

All they need to do is port their existing software to ARM, and then people will buy it because it's apple and it "just works"

But then the Mac becomes Windows 10S and nobody wants Windows 10S

[captain_to_fire]

1 minute ago, Streetguru said:

That seems to be the way they want to go though, I mean how many people actually need high end hardware in a mac? Final Cut Pro? What else?

The laptops could easily replace intel with ARM soon as iOS/macOS are combined.

I’d rather see Apple kill the current MacBook line which is expensive in terms of price to performance: $1300 for a core m3 MacBook? Fuck no! I’d rather get the non touchbar MacBook Pro for that price. But I’d rather see Apple use two processors for their MacBook Pros: their A11X Bionic SoC for lighter tasks like FaceTime, iMessage or Safari and the ULV i5/i7 Coffee Lake CPU + mobile Radeon GPU for resource intensive tasks like video editing, gaming, etc and the OS will do the hand off between processors on which apps will use the Intel chip or the Apple chip. Apple can easily make macOS universal binary just like what they did in 2006 by releasing Mac OS X Tiger for Intel and developers just need to update their apps to be universal binary. 

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Well yeah, but the amount of money itself is an issue

$100 is too much for the ability to profit heavily off a good app idea?

 

I'm sorry but I don't see a way to validate your viewpoint.