Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Desktops (Apple) IOS Programming

Apple To Target Combining iPhone, iPad and Mac Apps by 2021: Report (bloomberg.com) 124

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
Mark Gurman, reporting for Bloomberg: Apple wants to make it easier for software coders to create tools, games and other applications for its main devices in one fell swoop -- an overhaul designed to encourage app development and, ultimately, boost revenue. The ultimate goal of the multistep initiative, code-named "Marzipan," is by 2021 to help developers build an app once and have it work on the iPhone, iPad and Mac computers, said people familiar with the effort. That should spur the creation of new software, increasing the utility of the company's gadgets.

Later this year, Apple plans to let developers port their iPad apps to Mac computers via a new software development kit that the company will release as early as June at its annual developer conference. Developers will still need to submit separate versions of the app to Apple's iOS and Mac App Stores, but the new kit will mean they don't have to write the underlying software code twice, said the people familiar with the plan. In 2020, Apple plans to expand the kit so iPhone applications can be converted into Mac apps in the same way. Further reading: Tim Cook, in April 2018: Users Don't Want iOS To Merge With MacOS.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple To Target Combining iPhone, iPad and Mac Apps by 2021: Report More

Apple To Target Combining iPhone, iPad and Mac Apps by 2021: Report

Comments Filter:

  • Sounds nice... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @06:13AM (#58151004)

    Later this year, Apple plans to let developers port their iPad apps to Mac computers via a new software development kit that the company will release as early as June at its annual developer conference. Developers will still need to submit separate versions of the app to Apple's iOS and Mac App Stores, but the new kit will mean they don't have to write the underlying software code twice, said the people familiar with the plan. In 2020, Apple plans to expand the kit so iPhone applications can be converted into Mac apps in the same way.

    Sounds like a sensible thing to do. Having said that, I am also looking forward to a long list of people chiming in here on Slashdot to explain to us how this is only one part of a vast malevolent Apple conspiracy against the public.

    • Re:Sounds nice... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Lurks ( 526137 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @06:25AM (#58151026) Homepage

      Okay I'll bite. Because we have it already, it's the goddamn web. Which you can build desktop and mobile apps out of, which just needs some support from Apple for the fancier bits of the standards behind PWAs but which Apple wont support ... because it doesn't force you to buy their goddamn desktop computers just to make things for their mobile phones.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        So apps like the Adobe creative cloud suite and Final Cut Pro run on the web? Really? What? I think you're mistaken.

        • There isn't much reason why it cannot run on the web.
          The Modern Web Browser is a thin client solution. Even traditional CPU intensive programs, can run on the web now. Because the the heavy CPU stuff is happening in the Cloud, shared with others All the browser and you normally just need a way to input the data into the system, and get the output back.

        • I don't think you've been paying attention. Numerous Android and iOS apps are merely Angular, Ionic, etc. web applications running inside a Cordova container. On the Linux/MacOS/Windows desktops numerous apps (e.g.: Slack, VS Code) are merely web applications running inside a some kind of NodeJS container like Electron.

          So yes, they're web apps, just running locally.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Lurks ( 526137 )

            Indeed. Comments here reflect a lack of understanding about what modern web apps are like and how pervasive they are.

      • Consolidation (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @10:15AM (#58151828)

        Because we have it already, it's the goddamn web. Which you can build desktop and mobile apps out of

        Yeah Apple tried this with the original iPhone. They were going to do everything on the web if you recall. Didn't work. Why? So glad you asked. Because not everything can/should/does need to be done on the web. There are literally countless use cases which are better done locally than on the web. PWAs have their place and will be great for some use cases but they aren't the proper solution for every problem.

        I've been saying for years that mobile device software is going to gradually merge with PC software. While there are some practical difficulties in doing this, it makes a ton of sense if someone can pull it off. Microsoft has been trying to get the formula right on this for a long time with mixed success. Google is trying to get Android to be more than just a mobile phone OS. It's not an easy problem but there really is no long term advantage to Apple or to their users in maintaining two separate and mostly incompatible operating systems. Nobody has nailed the formula yet but the first company to figure it out is going to rake in a lot of money for their trouble.

        I know Apple has historically said they aren't interesting in merging MacOS and iOS but you can tell by their actions that this was just a public relations move so they wouldn't get pushed on it. They've been gradually moving towards consolidating their hardware and systems for quite a while now. The problem with doing so has been A) reconciling the very different user interfaces in a practical way and B) the limitations of the hardware of the day. Over time these problems can be resolved but not before a certain tipping point is reached.

        • Re: Consolidation (Score:5, Insightful)

          by reanjr ( 588767 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @10:27AM (#58151916) Homepage

          "Not everything can/should/does need to be done" on a generic unified platform that forces developers to lowest common denominator.

          • Unified devices greater than sum of parts (Score:4, Insightful)

            by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @11:06AM (#58152132)

            "Not everything can/should/does need to be done" on a generic unified platform that forces developers to lowest common denominator.

            You are arguing that general purpose computers are de-facto a lowest common denominator. Your argument makes no sense and unified platforms are often greater than the sum of the parts. In case you have forgotten both PCs and smartphones are generic unified platforms. My smartphone replaced to varying degrees my (deep breath...) calendar, point-and-shoot camera, PDA, video recorder, laptop (for some use cases), walkman, photo album, flashlight, television, credit card (ApplePay/GooglePay), voicemail machine, remote control, alarm clock, to-do list, GPS, address book, weather station, physical books (kindle app), encyclopedia, and the list goes on. PCs have replaced a similar swath of equipment. Both are general purpose devices that can be programmed to do whatever task we need. There is no objective reason PCs and smartphones have to exist as separate operating systems for the rest of eternity and there are a lot of compelling reasons to want to merge them into a single code base.

            Are you seriously going to argue that the smartphone is somehow a "lowest common denominator"? Sure I can schlep around my big heavy SLR camera which can take better pictures (at considerable cost) but at the expense of portability and convenience. It makes more sense to take Good Enough pictures with my phone 99% of the time. On the occasion when I need better image quality I know where/how to get it but that isn't a sane argument against "generic unified platforms".

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by _xeno_ ( 155264 )

            Apple's problem is that no one has any reason to develop proper macOS applications these days. No one really uses macOS outside of people developing iOS apps.

            So creating this unified platform is less about something that makes sense as a tool you should use, and more about Apple desperately trying to get people to release macOS apps on the macOS App Store that literally no one uses.

            • No one really uses macOS outside of people developing iOS apps.
              You are an idiot. (Where do actually all the Mac applications come from?)

              Go to any developer conference, especially if it is centered around Java, and look what the people have on their desk: 80% are Mac's and I would bet a huge deal of the remaining run Linux.

        • But with apple ios is
          No finder
          No / limited apps shearing data files.
          No / limited mods / plugins
          limited emulators with rom folders
          No nvidia if the ios lockdown comes to apple desktops even with TB based pci-e cards.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I'd prefer apps did not require the web to function. I like being able to have functionality with my business if a connection went down. There are so many companies that are so cloud dependent that if there were any significant loss of Internet connectivity, they likely would be bankrupt in a few days.

        The cloud is worse than the mainframe. At least if you didn't pay IBM, you got to keep your mainframe, although with no support. Don't pay your cloud bill, kiss access to all your data goodbye. I'm amazed

      • No. Just: no. That is all.

      • PWAs work on iPhones/iPads since decades. (Progressive Web Apps)
        And there is nothing special "to support", just use HTML5 and be done with it.

        I hate stupid haters ...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Well, for starters, what it means is if you're writing something, you now have to write it for the lowest common denominator.

      • Or you can specify minimum device requirements, which is the way both the iOS and desktop app stores deal with multiple generations of hardware and OS right now.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Well, yes, but then you aren't really writing "one app for all platforms", now are you? If one really wants a "write once and run on all platforms", you are inherently limited by the lowest common denominator. If you want more functionality on more powerful systems, now you're writing multi-platform code which allows you to reuse common components among multiple versions, but still requires separate development for each platform. And if that's what Apple is aiming for with this, well, then shit, they sho

    • Slashdot to explain to us how this is only one part of a vast malevolent Apple conspiracy against the public.

      It's not a malevolent conspiracy. It's just Apple being last to the market copying all the least desirable aspects from other platforms. And honestly it's about time. I was getting sick of well designed purpose built applications and was just thinking the other day why can't everyone be the Universal Windows Platform and write horrible phone applications for the PC.

  • Dumbed down Mac OS apps? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nicolaiplum ( 169077 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @06:39AM (#58151064)

    What's going to be the leading platform for capabilities in the software design?

    Is this going to be apps designed for Mac OS first and then adapted for iOS and touch interface limitations?

    Or is it going to be iOS applications running on Mac OS with all the small-screen, touch interface, single task, single window restrictions of iOS design in the Mac OS app?

    I fear it will be the second one, and Mac OS apps will get worse as a result.

    I have an iPad pro and I've tried working on it. I'm using a Mac and not an iPad because the iPad is no use for serious, creative work.

    • Re:Dumbed down Mac OS apps? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by swimboy ( 30943 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @07:40AM (#58151214)

      We already have a few Marzipan apps in MacOS 10.14, namely the News and Home apps. And your fears are well founded. I'm hoping that they're just proof-of-concept apps and that Apple will figure out how to expand the UI to encompass more Mac-like behavior on the mac, because right now, the only good thing that you can say about Marzipan apps on the Mac is that when you click on them, they launch.

      • They will be brave, removing the keyboard and having to type on an iPhone over Bluetooth. Because she wants to learn touch typing when your thumbs Just Work?

      • I'm not sure that having them launch is a good thing.

      • We already have a few Marzipan apps in MacOS 10.14, namely the News and Home apps. And your fears are well founded.

        Those are basically test apps of a pre-release version of the framework, the final version will have a lot more ability and not be so removed from the system.

        There's no reason to think Marzipan apps need be much less featured, when iOS has many of the same frameworks the Mac does for doing just about anything. The reason Marzipan exists is because the Mac UI framework is pretty old at this poi

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by swimboy ( 30943 )

          I understand that this is just the start of Marzipan, but the Home and News apps are just clones of the iPad apps. Even if the Marzipan framework supplies tons of extra features to make the Mac apps perform like Mac apps, it's still not going to stop 3rd parties from doing the same thing as Apple did: namely take their iPad app and run it through Marzipan to provide a sub-par experience on the Mac.

          Maybe for new apps that get developed for all platforms at the same time with Marzipan in mind will turn out we

          • it's still not going to stop 3rd parties from doing the same thing as Apple did: namely take their iPad app and run it through Marzipan to provide a sub-par experience on the Mac.

            That's kind of what Appel did but in part they were limited by Marzipan itself. Third parties (and Apple) have a lot of incentive to make Mac versions of the app better, the same way developers already add things to make iPad versions different and better than iPhone versions. It improves sales and makes people happy, so devs wil

    • Microsoft tried this like twice (if not thrice) since Windows 8. As to the subject: "Desktop class applications and networking. Not the crippled stuff that you find on most phones."

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mattb47 ( 85083 )

        execthts: Thank you! Windows users greeted the tablet/phone centric changes of Windows 8 like the proverbial turd in a punchbowl.

        Desktops/laptops with keyboard and mice allow you to have considerably more complex and powerful applications. And desktop/laptop users do NOT want touch interfaces.

        If Apple's push here means that Macs can run iOS apps, then that's reasonably laudable and will probably be welcomed by Mac users.

        If Apple wants to dumb down Macs to an iOS level interface, however, users will be ve

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kick6 ( 1081615 )

      I have an iPad pro and I've tried working on it. I'm using a Mac and not an iPad because the iPad is no use for serious, creative work.

      but..but..but...it has pro in the name! That means it's for professionals! /s

    • I don't think there's any doubt that one of the things that will happen is, iOS developers will make lazy macOS ports of their apps, creating junky apps that look and behave like mobile apps running incongruously on a desktop OS. I don't see that as a problem in and of itself. Give developers tools, and let them do what they want. Some will make junk, but that's fine.

      Just so long as Apple doesn't use it as an excuse to further limit what developers can do on their OS. We need iOS to become more open li

    • Or is it going to be iOS applications running on Mac OS ?

      The Marzipan effort is entirely about allowing you to use IOS frameworks for Mac apps.

      with all the small-screen, touch interface, single task, single window restrictions of iOS design in the Mac OS app

      What the hell man.

      The iPad screens are already fairly large.

      Yes the UI is touch but also keyboard, or perhaps you forgot that?

      iOS apps are far from "single task", and on the iPad support things like side by side apps with a floating window playing video

    • I fear what you fear, the complete dumbed-down IOSification of OSX and it's applications.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      No ad blocking, no firewalls to stop ads. No way to get past the OS.
      Browsers that have to allow ads to get OS approved.

  • Windows 8 A!! OVER! AGAIN! (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Only this time it'll work! Just you wait and see! I stake your life savings on it!

    • Windows 8 was just ahead of its time.

      • It will be cool and innovative (and courageous!) this time, because Apple Is Doing It First.

      • The problem with MS isn’t that they have bad ideas. Implementation has always been their weakness. Windows 8 would have worked much better if it defaulted to desktop UI when you were on a desktop and tablet UI when you were on tablet instead of trying to force everyone to tablet and doing it badly.

      • If you mean that we're heading for a cliff with the development of our systems and it decided to be ahead, then yes.

    • The main difference will be that this time there will not be a Version 2 that lets you undo the bullshit.

  • The hardware, not the software. I want a phone that unfolds into a tablet, then a keyboard will fold out to become a laptop.

  • User Rights (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Though I don't own any Apple products, I always said they make good hardware and I'd happily use a Mac if they were cheaper to buy, but that all hinges on having 2 things:
    - The ability to download and install apps outside the walled garden without having to depend on a jailbreak method.
    - Admin privileges with the ability to view/manipulate my own filesystem.
    If they sabotage either of those two things, I can't seriously recommend anyone buy a Mac anymore.

  • Create apps that run on smartphones, tablets and traditional computers?

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by King_TJ ( 85913 )

        I dunno? My experience on the desktop is, you really DO want native apps vs "yet another app you use as a web page in your favorite browser". If nothing else, it's just advantageous from the standpoint of keeping things compartmentalized while utilizing the whole UI that's been built around manipulating individual apps.

        As one example? Our office VoIP system used to use a control panel that ran in Java. It was cross-platform Mac and Windows compatible that way. Eventually, the company decided it was less d

  • Fundamentally I think this is the right idea. Merge the developer experience to the extent possible, i.e. outside of the interface design. Merge the retail experience. Look how much better the iPhone/iPad experience is with universal apps.

    But leave the user experience separate. Because a phone is different from a tablet is different from a traditional computer. Trying for the same user experience across the board is not that great.

    How knows? Maybe in the process we'll get pointer support on iPad Pros and be

  • Sheesh... can Tim Cook possibly innovate something new rather than rebrand inherent Obj-C ability to abstract over multiple platforms?

    This capability was built last century by NeXT. Its not simple to update it to iOS. BUT it's an inherent attribute of the language both MacOS X and iOS operating systems share. The two aren't compatible. I don't see the value in masquerading a dingy as a cruise ship. It would be the ultimate undoing of MacOS X desktop to trivialize applications down to iOS thumbnail capabi

    • It's all Swift now. Obj-C is viewed as legacy there. They don't say it officially, but it's pretty evident. After writing in Swift for half a year, I think it's a good move. It started out as a mutt, but they've been very open on refining it. The APIs are already pretty close but for some naming conventions. My porting from Obj-C to Swift wasn't too painful. Xcode helps that quite a bit. The port code is smaller, faster and more (ugh that word) elegant. I wouldn't want to go back to Obj-C and it's -way- mo

  • Steve Jobs had said that merging Mac and iOS platforms didn't make sense, and he was right... At the time. The technology wasn't available to make a worthwhile product.

    But Microsoft introduced the Surface YEARS ago. Apple ceded a lot of "influencer" users to Microsoft, especially creatives who wanted a proper pen tablet computer.

    Apple should have been at the front of the tablet (fully fledged) computer movement. Now we see just how long we'll have to wait for them to catch up.

    Maybe by 2030 they'll reali

  • But I have a pretty strong hunch it'll never happen.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sebby ( 238625 )

      But I have a pretty strong hunch it'll never happen.

      It'll happen, just not the same way Xcode works now...

      Think of how they've done the Swift playgrounds. And how they process submitted app builds' byte-code to make it platform-independant, but produce hardware-specific builds for distribution.

      Now think of how they can provide a sort of terminal-like version of Xcode, where you program on the iPad, but the building is actually done by a server cluster farm Apple provides. It simplifies development (build-wise) and distribution, and removes the dependency to

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mark-t ( 151149 )

        Removing the requirement to have a Mac to develop iDevice applications means that it becomes increasingly practical for non-developers to install applications from source on their devices.... applications that might do things that bypass normal App store restrictions. p> I don't think Apple wants to do that.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Sebby ( 238625 )

          Removing the requirement to have a Mac to develop iDevice applications means that it becomes increasingly practical for non-developers to install applications from source on their devices.... applications that might do things that bypass normal App store restrictions.

          I don't think Apple wants to do that.

          Doing it this way doesn't mean Apple will 'give up' its control - in fact knowing Apple I don't expect it to make it 'easy' for anyone to bypass its store, and will likely eliminate side-loading (betcha we won't be able to 'import' github projects); I don't envision Apple allowing the building process to not go through its own services in order to restrict things.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by mark-t ( 151149 )

            So they will have to deliberately "cripple" XCode in order to make it viable on iDevices.

            Not being able to import source code into a development environment completely defeats the point of having one.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Sebby ( 238625 )

              So they will have to deliberately "cripple" XCode in order to make it viable on iDevices.

              "Cripple" is Apple's middle name, because courage.

  • Microsoft tried this. And look at all those nice Windows Phones now! I guess I know now when to switch to Android :)

  • Always funny (Score:5, Funny)

    by reanjr ( 588767 ) on Wednesday February 20, 2019 @10:25AM (#58151898) Homepage

    Always funny when Apple discovers Microsoft's strategies from decades past.

    • That’s assuming that hasn’t been Apple’s strategy. It might have been all along but Apple didn’t think that enough development had been done. For example you could argue that the iPod Touch was a copy of the Zune but done right. However, if you were paying attention to Apple it seemed like they were going to make it after the iPhone and leverage all the technologies. For the most part, an iPod Touch is an iPhone without the cellular components.
  • Most of the system may not support the upgraded version of the Windows-based system due to some specific restrictions. To resolve these issues may contact with an https://applesupportnumber.net... [applesupportnumber.net] that will guide them to overcome these situations.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If there isn't a population problem, why is the government putting cancer in the cigarettes?" -- the elder Steptoe, c. 1970

Close