Slashdot Mirror
Apple Plans Combined iPhone, iPad and Mac Apps To Create One User Experience (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader shares a Bloomberg report: Apple's iPhone and iPad introduced a novel way of interacting with computers: via easy-to-use applications, accessible in the highly curated App Store. The same approach hasn't worked nearly as well on Apple's desktops and laptops. The Mac App Store is a ghost town of limited selection and rarely updated programs. Now Apple plans to change that by giving people a way to use a single set of apps that work equally well across its family of devices: iPhones, iPads and Macs. 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 hardware, according to people familiar with the matter. Developers currently must design two different apps -- one for iOS, the operating system of Apple's mobile devices, and one for macOS, the system that runs Macs. With a single app for all machines, Mac, iPad and iPhone users will get new features and updates at the same time.
So how has this worked out for Windows so far?
Not
And this will probably precede yet another CPU architecture shift to their own chips.
macOS and iOS use 2 different UI frameworks (CocoaTouch and UIKit, respectively). And this causes problems when trying to compile the source code between the two platforms. Ex: things like color and girth are defined specifically in each framework (NSFont and NSColor versus UIFont and UIColor). If they combine these frameworks, it makes the design and maintenance of cross platform software a lot easier (it'll still be difficult), and the at the very least, you wouldn't have to stub out a bunch of class names and files.
BUT - the most important work is still on the developer to ensure that their app runs great on iPhone, iPad and Mac and has a cohesive UI that scales and takes advantages of the different technologies. It's no different from Responsive Web Design or the shift from iPhone to iPad (and vice versa). Kudos to Apple for the courageous approach to their failure of an app store on desktop.
We all grew used to MS being the copycat and doing everything Apple does a few years later.
But the other way around? Really? Especially after pretty much everyone, even the dimmest computer illiterate noticed that touch-oriented input is simply atrocious for desktop GUIs and that you can't really design an interface that works well for clicking with a mouse and touching with fat fingers?
Well, ok, go ahead. Back with Steve still on the helm I'd say, maybe they know what they're doing, maybe they have a solution for this design problem that MS failed at.
But with Timmie calling the shots? Nope.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This makes perfect sense. Why do I need to keep buying apps for different platforms? Now we should be able to buy one app or subscription and use it on up to 10 devices.
The problem is the restrictions in it. These restrictions are both technical and commercial.
Technical first - the sandbox is great in iOSland. In Macland I want to run things like VMware, or command line utilities, or emulators, or hardware drivers, or...you get the idea. The sandbox stops all that.
The next one is commercial - I am used to paying upgrade prices, not junking and paying full price each time. Definitely needs an upgrade model in the store. I actually think that this is the largest of all the obstacles in the Mac update store.
Apple should not have hired the Windows Vista/8 product manager.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Remember the failure of the Amphi-car? it was neither a very good boat nor a very good car...
This is how I see apps that are trying to be all things .. phones / tablets / desktops have very different UIs ..and for good reason.
Play to each platforms strengths.. Microsoft tried to do this with its windows store Universal Plaform stuff and well, I can't speak for anyone else, but even on my Surface pro, I never run those "apps" .. I use it like a PC.. keyboard and touchpad/mouse
The Digital Sorceress
UIKit is a part of Cocoa Touch. I believe you meant AppKit.
Separating content from presentation, graceful degradation, etc have very strong unix roots. It was in the context of character terminals interacting with graphical displays, but still, nroff, troff, LaTeX, TeX, original HTML are all really markup languages interpreting data appropriately for the devices that consume them.
So done correctly, it could work
Apple has a track record of doing it right. So it could work for Apple, though a similar attempt by Microsoft was pathetic.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I'm reminded of the FatBinary approach Apple took with applications that ran on PowerPC chips and x86 machines. It is a step in the right direction... but there are a ton of things that can't really be unified across iOS and macOS:
1: The UI frameworks as the parent stated. This is a major issue. /Applications and pretty much can do whatever they feel like.
2: UI events. Microsoft tried to unify this and failed, because there is a reason why the UI on a 5K screen is different from a 5-7" wide smartphone. Stuff like right-click dragging makes no sense when it comes to iPhones or iPads.
3: The frameworks are different. Apps on iOS reside in their own little jailed worlds. Apps on macOS sit in
4: Companies can't really release iOS apps the same time as macOS.
As an option, this might be useful, but forcing devs to do this might be an exercise in failure.
The thing is that Xcode compiles iOS apps for Intel anyway and they run natively on the Mac. It won't be rocket science to get cross-platform apps. And then Apple will have it much easier to switch to their own SoCs for MacBooks.
I believe this is the reason Macbooks don't have touchscreens yet - Apple has been working on some way of bringing iOS UI / app compatibility to OSX for a full integration, but they haven't been able to pull it off from the software standpoint. Thus no touchscreen until that happens. Think about it... there are only three options for introducing a touchscreen. 1) Merely another input device, which won't work well at all because widgets are too small for touch interaction and none of the apps would support gestures, multi-touch, touch and hold, etc. 2) Yet another UI for touch interface somehow bootstrapped into OSX (make widgets bigger, make controls respond to dragging - IE what Microsoft did). 3) Integration of iOS and OSX in some hybrid way that brings the best of both into one device, and suddenly makes Macbooks way more appealing since they can run the massive library of iPad apps immediately.
You better believe that back in the Apple labs there are Macbooks with Apple ARM SOCs embedded in them (A11, etc) that can run iOS apps natively that have touchscreens, but they haven't managed to refine the OS UI to an acceptable point so far. This Slashdot story is a step in that direction, getting OSX developers on board and preparing their OSX apps for that environment. The iOS apps should be trivial - just need a touchscreen. iOS apps that can benefit from hardware keyboard, etc, already have that support anyway.
Better known as 318230.
... have you heard of a company called Canonical?
They tried this Unity thing where they attempted to merge the standard desktop interface with a mobile/touch interface.
Sounds like what you're trying to do. Maybe you could find out how it went for them?
Apple's best, least offensive product, and they've decided to go to a lot of trouble to make it suck. Brilliant. I think this is Apple's way of saying "it's time for everyone to move on from Mac OS. There's Windows, Linux, and maybe whatever Google's pushing this year if you're dumb enough to fall for that. Good luck, former users!"
And why is this happening? Because of all you self-loathing fuckwits who bought iOS devices. You voted with your wallets that shitty, uncontrollable, anti-user operating systems are ok. So now you don't get Mac OS anymore, because some bean counter is looking at how many of each, they're selling.
Who killed Apple? Its customers! No, you didn't kill them financially, but you did remove them from relevance in the tech world, essentially. All by lowering your standards to such an extreme degree. You didn't have to do that. Apple could have remained a symbol of quality (which at times it really has been), but now they're considered lower than the cheapest malware-infested Chinese imports. They were capable of keeping up and even occasionally leapfrogging into leadership, but you told them to give up and suck. That's what happens when you throw money at shitty products. Your vote matters and this story is a great example of the consequences.
Sorry, former Mac fans. If you're one of the people who had average (or higher) expectations and therefore couldn't tolerate the thought of downgrading to an iPhone, maybe it's not directly your fault, but I bet you know someone who gave no fucks and you didn't say anything. So here we are. It's like this: you may have voted against Trump but he's still your president. Maybe you should have said something.
Jesus, what is with the UIX designers? Did they see the windows 8 debacle and think, "I want me some of that!"
Here's some free knowledge: Different devices require different usage profiles. Desktops are more multi-purpose and have the advantage of a mouse and keyboard, meaning a touch interface makes no damn sense on them. Tablets have more screen than your average phone, so your designs should take advantage of that. Phones are the lowest screen space and usability, so you need an entirely different UIX methodology.
Seriously, someone write this down so we don't have to go through this nonsense again.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Yip
Apple confirms it's a mobile device company, and is going to finally rid itself of the antiquated albatross that is the Mac line.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Unless or until I can develop and publish iOS apps with only an iOS device, they cannot possibly claim to offer a combined experience on a single device.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Apple's iPhone and iPad introduced a novel way of interacting with computers:
The first sentence from TFA is bulshit. I tried to send some photo from my iPhone to a laptop via bluetooth, and my iPhone won't pair the device because the other device is not Apple! WTH is Apple doing? Bluetooth is an open standard, anybody can implement bluetooth on their product even, at the cockpit of a million dollar jet, but Apple won't connect to other bluetooth enabled device if that device doesn't have an Apple logo. Crappy practice by Apple, it just encourages more e-wastes due to its walled garden approach.
Since everyone who has tried this "unified app" thing so far has done little more than demonstrate that it's a pretty terrible idea, I'm curious to see if Apple has some approach that could actually make it not suck.
Apple has always copied. Apple's strategy has never been of the innovator. The strategy has always been the fast follower strategy. They let other be on the bleeding edge and learn from their mistakes and come in with a much more polished, dumbed down and well integrated version. What this does is by the time Apple brings a product to market the market is ready for it but also frustrated with the incumbents and ready to accept fewer functionality for greater reliability and ease of use.
The Mac was a copy of Xerox PARC
Mac OS is a copy of Unix
The iPod was a copy of various cheap mp3 players
The iPhone is a copy of the Motorola Rokr - the first phone to play iTunes as well of various Windows Phone 6 Touchphones from HP
The iPad is a well put together version of countless Samsung tablets
The Watch is a copy of various Android gear smartwatches
Apple Pay is a copy of countless systems which have been there in Japan for almost 25 years now
The Homepod is a copy of Alexa, Google Home etc
Almost nothing Apple does is original . It just does it better and takes over a market.
**Life is too short to be serious**
[old man rant]
I'm sure that whatever they end up doing will bump up the share price, and for that I am grateful.
However, I got into this Mac thing because I had work to do. I have things I need to get done — things that people pay me to do. 20+ years later, I am concerned by the lack of user-upgradeable pro-quality machines. $5k for an iMac seriously??? And don't get me started on the iPhone with its non-replaceable battery and lack of expandable storage.
I want a computer and phone that just work. I want to be able to add RAM or a new SSD when I want. I might even like a monitor larger than 27" and an upgradeable GPU. But who am I kidding? I'm just one guy with a collection of old Macs and a few shares of stock that I'm holding onto until I can retire.
Bah, humbug!
[/old man rant]
Macs are toys after all.
A lot of us iOS users have been hoping they'd do this for ages. Basically what I want is an iPad or iPhone, but scaled up to 24" or, preferably, 32". The OSX interface on my iMac is way too confusing when switching between it and my iPad, and if they could converge the two then that would be top. I really hope they also ditch the hopelessly outdated keyboard (hello, 1960s!) and trackpad/mouse hardware and go for touchscreen-only instead.
Another thing is security. OSX is already fairly secure, but users are still able to modify the file system and install apps without any kind of validation from Apple. If the app store was made the sole app source then that would close off a whole bunch of security issues in one swoop.
I just hope Apple are as brave as Steve Jobs once was.
After all, if memory serves, it worked so well for Microsoft.
oh good, iTerm2 for ipad.
what about finder for IOS?? or will mac os get locked down like IOS?
The problem with mobile-based applications is not their reliance on a touch interface, but the fact their functionality is severely crippled compared to their desktop counterparts. This is true for store apps on mac and windows too, and this is why unifying the two concepts is a really bad idea.
Apple's latest update for Garageband for iOS has all kinds of substantial features that the desktop version didn't get.
https://www.apple.com/ca/newsroom/2017/11/garageband-brings-new-sound-library-and-classic-beat-sequencer/
It worked out great didn't it? About the worst framework ever. Just don't fucking do this.
there was a reason to buy a Mac. Overpriced, underperforming, and non-upgradable.
Yeah, that's what I want in a computer.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Scaling is a big problem for iOS. When Apple made the Mac, they Did It Right. Both MacOS and OS X are DPI-aware (dots per inch). When you plug a monitor into the Mac, it queries the monitor for the model, looks it up in a database to determine the screen size Then it takes the display resolution, divides it by the screen size to calculate a PPI (pixels per inch). Then scales the UI elements appropriately. Apple originally had to develop this for their Postscript laser printer way back in the 1980s. They integrated it into the Mac so when page layout artists were working on a Mac, an 11 point font on the screen was exactly the same physical size as when it was printed out.
That's why the Macs had no problem with switching to the high-PPI Retina displays, while Windows still has lots of problems with 3k and 4k screens. Windows isn't aware of your screen's size and DPI, OS X is. Microsoft fixed this with Windows 8, so the system fonts, icons, and menus scale (based on a % you set, not on the screen's physical size). But apps which don't use the system fonts and menus don't benefit from this. That's why the UI in Adobe's apps are microscopic when you run them on Windows on a 4k screen. Adobe eschewed Windows' built-in menu system to build their own (probably so they could implement tear-off menu bars). That's why when you try to run an older Windows app with any scaling other than 100%, the fonts look blurry - Windows is simply rescaling the bitmap of the font, instead of substituting a correctly-scaled font which takes advantage of subpixel rendering.
Then Apple made probably their biggest blunder with iOS. They ditched this tremendously successful DPI-aware model, and made iOS dependent on a fixed resolution and screen size. Apparently Steve drank too much of his own kool-aid and decided since 3.5" with a 4:3 aspect ratio was the "perfect" screen size and There Would Never Be any other screen size, iOS didn't need to be DPI-aware. That's why they stuck with the original 3.5" screen for so long, why when they did increase the resolution they did it by doubling the DPI, and when they increased the screen size they initially did it by stretching the screen (adding more to the top/bottom). Because that was the only way to do it without breaking the UI of older apps. This is most apparent in the iPad Mini - it uses the same resolution as the iPad, but on a smaller screen. Resulting in everything it displays being smaller than on a regular iPad. They could add scaling to iOS now, but it would be like the situation with Windows and every app in the App Store would need to be re-written to be DPI-aware.
Ironically, Android is DPI-aware. Google didn't know the sizes of the Android devices manufacturers would make, so they had to make Android DPI-aware. A lot of Android apps ignore it, but the setting is in there. When properly used, the icons and fonts on Android are the same size whether you run the app on a phone or a tablet. And unlike the Mac where it's fixed depending on your monitor size, you can override it in Android. When I got a tablet for my elderly parents, I rooted it and set the DPI as if the screen size were 33% smaller than it really was. That had the effect of automatically making all of Android's icons and fonts 1.5x bigger, which really helped my parents use the tablet.
The latter. Why would you need Finder when they want you to just search? Same shit MickeySoft is doing with Win10/8/7. Hide useful settings in vaguely named "apps" and then just tell people to search for it.
Article contains no facts and makes no sense –don't bother reading. Any macOS/iOS developer or user of the Mac App Store would be scratching their head.
Equals, Crappy Apps.
Every iOS app has been able to query the UIScreen object for its scale and size in points. What apps do with that is up to the developer. I know that it's not exactly the same as PPI, nor DPI, but it serves well enough.
> Ironically, Android is DPI-aware.
Sorry, how is that ironic?
Apple has become what its 1984 super bowl ad implied it was liberating us from.
Looks like Apple is ripe for being liberated from.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"
This idea worked so well for Microsoft...
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
So how has this worked out for Windows so far?
Doesn't really matter unless Apple copies what Microsoft did. The idea of apps that work across different devices with common development underpinnings is a very reasonable one. It's just not super easy to pull off. But the first company to do it well will probably make some serious bank so it's worth working on. And frankly Microsoft, Google and Apple are all working towards harmonized apps in one way or another and have been for a long time.
Unfortunately, what you write is just not true.
MacOS does not support arbitrary scaling. While the graphics system was built on Postscript, non-integral scaling factors turned out to bring too many problems. Fortunately, the technological progress in screen technology made high DPI-monitors possible and so Apple decided to stick with integral scaling factors. This is why all early Retina-displays exactly double the dimensions of older displays.
This works exactly the same way on macOS as on iOS btw.
For intermediary resolutions, macOS maintains a higher resolution backing store and uses graphics hardware to scale down the resulting image.
Re-invent well known nonsense. HP had fat binaries too. On a phone or a watch memory comes at a premium. More interesting was the initial approach to not have applications on the iPhone. This did not work out too well. Apple should take care that developers are assisted to develop Model View Controller type applications across platforms. So far iCloud gives not much support when you intend to synchronize content across platforms. In the end all applications need to be suited/adapted for collaborative work.
A few years ago, Apple replaced its Mac OS iPhoto app with Photos. This removed a lot of functionality in order to have a more consistent experience between Mac and iPhone photo apps.
If that's the future of more Mac OS apps, I'm not looking forward to it.
I was being sarcastic.
Sorry, how was that sarcastic? :)
Another fucking 'Windows store'
I don't see this move by Apple as innovation - they are just trying to ride the same strategy Google has been floating for a couple years. I feel that one of the biggest failures in that strategy has been Google's insistance of selling new hardware (underpowered laptops) to get the new capability. If they would unleash the OS to be run by most modern (Intel Core) devices, I think the interest level would rocket. Many simple users would enjoy the bigger screen and same UI for their desktop/laptop devices.
The scale and size in points give you JUST the actual resolution. You still have no idea how large items are, which was the GP's point. I mean, I won't go in the debate of how much better a DPI method would be, but you respond to a post saying on iOS you only know the resolution and that is a problem, by explaining how you can calculate the resolution...
By far the worst is the hamburger lady
microsoft promised that for windows 7. canceled. then they promised it for windows 8. they even got 8.1 mobile. canceled. then they promised it for windows 10 to the extreme - phones, tablets, xboxes, desktops, one uwp system to rule them all. canceled. good luck with that apple. especially with how everything is going so /swimingly/ for yall without steve jobs.
The other aspect of this is Apple should build in legacy support so that all old software, all the way back to the Apple I, works on modern Macs, iPads, iPhones, iPodTouch, etc. Heck, they already have, sort of, Windows support and they could bring that in native too. With just a bit more work add CPM, full Linux, DOS, PDP, Cray, Howell, etc support too. Then all those legacy hardware systems could be upgraded to new Apple hardware. That would open an enormous market for them.
My company has been working on projects that involve Scalable UI for over 20 years. Automated solutions just don't work well. The only solution that does is designing specific UI for each device and form factor targeted. Sharing workhorse code behind the scenes is fine, but when when it comes to user interface tables/phone and desktop/laptops are completely different beasts with different displays and different input devices. What works well on one will always be a huge compromise on the other.
So glad I kept my Cubase license active.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
So one tech journalist, albeit a good one, posts a well sourced RUMOR, and the tech press loses its freaking mind.
Lets wait for some response from Apple before totally loseing our ish.
Mkay?
Technically, you can build apps in Qt and run them on any device but the results can be pretty messy.
Apple doesn't have many toes left, so they might as well take aim, & blow the rest of 'em off.
I'd really love to know where the myth of OS X ever supporting scaling comes from.
Not only does it not support scaling (beyond integer factors), it has you lay out UI elements on a pixel-by-pixel basis. You have very limited ability to say "this item gets bigger" as a window is resized but you can't lay out things so that things are sized based on text. (Basically you can say which UI elements receive what percentage of additional space as the window is resized.) E.g., you can't make a column where that column width is based on the widgets within that column. Instead you have to say each widget is a certain size in pixels.
Windows, on the other hand, has supported true display scaling (in that you can set a variable DPI) for ages. The problem was that while developers could query the Windows GDI to find out what the desktop DPI was, no one ever did. Instead they just placed widgets based on static pixel-by-pixel positions, and because Windows offered essentially no layout APIs, everything went to hell if the DPI changed.
But you COULD set a DPI as far back as Windows 95.
kool design maker is best graphics designing company in the USA https://www.kooldesignmaker.co...
FYI, Cocoa Touch is the iOS version of Cocoa. Apparently you've missed Apple's Metal 2 UI, which is basically Apple's recommendation for macOS 10.11 onwards. Metal 2 is the same API for macOS, iOS and tvOS, https://developer.apple.com/me...
On macOS they've basically stopped supporting OpenGL at 4.0, Carbon (mostly deprecated in OS X 10.5, 10.7 and finally 10.9) and Cocoa (nothing new since OS X 10.3).
But you COULD set a DPI as far back as Windows 3.11.
FTFY.
Kudos to Apple for the courageous approach to their failure of an app store on desktop.
So Apple is showing courage yet again?
What about Canonical with their Ubuntu One initiative that has since been tossed? What about Microsoft's Windows 10 everywhere (Phone, Tablet, Desktop, XBox)?
The whole point of the different frameworks is they are used for different hardware. I don't want a start menu on my phone, nor do I want tiles on my desktop.
design a single application that works with a touchscreen or mouse and trackpad
So ... it will only work with a touch screen because that will be the least common denominator?
Why do we even have keyboards now? Let's deprecate them also.