6 ms·

Why? Has anyone asked for this? I want my desktop apps to be dense and feature rich professional applications. My phone apps are relatively simple tools. I do

Why? Has anyone asked for this? I want my desktop apps to be dense and feature rich professional applications. My phone apps are relatively simple tools. I don’t understand why.

isostatic 8y ago
I had this discussion with someone yesterday, who was attempting to recreate a final cut pro news editing workflow, but do it on an iphone. I still have no idea why. Just because you can bang a nail in with a screwdriver, it doesn't mean you should when you've got a perfectly good hammer.
- post_break 8y ago
  People love to take an iPad and force it to replace their ipad and be like "See, I can do all my work on my iPad, you just need 23 apps, and a few cheats and dongles to make it work." I don't understand it. I have a macbook pro, I have an iPad. Trying to force one to replace the other just doesn't work.
TheCoreh 8y ago
Personally, I would love if my phone apps were dense and feature rich professional applications, too. A lot of times I want to do something and it feels like the apps are holding me back just for the sake of being excessively simple. I've had this feeling on both Android and iOS
- MobileVet 8y ago
  Seriously asking, was this sarcasm? I can see feature rich iPad apps... but is the phone meant for more than quick glances?
  - TheCoreh 8y ago
    It was not sarcasm. Sometimes quick glances can involve advanced tasks too. Or sometimes I'm on the go, with no tablet or computer and I still want to do something advanced, even if the phone screen is small. Besides there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to hook up my phone to an external display/mouse and get a full desktop experience. (Samsung is ahead of the pack in this, but the apps are still "mobile" versions that are not as fully fledged as their desktop counterparts)
    - MobileVet 8y ago
      Cool, thanks.
- laythea 8y ago
  Erm, Unfortunately, I suspect it will be that the professional apps will be (and are being) dumbed down.
- iambateman 8y ago
  I agree. Snapchat is great news for this desire. Eventually niche, high-use apps will reach degrees of complexity of which we can only dream right now.
cujo 8y ago
My hunch is that this isn't intended to just let iOS apps run on the desktop, but to allow developers to slap different UIs on their logic. It likely is more of a win for desktop devs as they'll presumably have an easier way to get their apps to iOS, or perhaps for game devs to have fewer requirements to port games.
frou_dh 8y ago
> Why? Has anyone asked for this? [...] I don’t understand why. There has probably been a decline in companies wanting to bother expending the effort to produce a separate AppKit version of their application solely to be able to target macOS. If an AppKit version is off the table, then between: - No app - A web app - An Electron app - A Marzipan app The Marzipan paradigm suddenly seems more appealing to Apple and Cocoa-faithful end users.
hrktb 8y ago
This is not just about desktop and phone though. I ask my iPad apps to be as dense and powerful as my desktop apps. In particular, the screen sizes are mostly similar now, processing power is on the same ballpark, and if anything the iPad has more potential than the laptop from a design perspective. So macOS <-> iPad parity. Then there's no technical reason to not have iPhone <-> iPad parity. You end up with the chain desktop <-> iPad <-> iPhone
coldtea 8y ago
>Why? Has anyone asked for this? I am asking for this. >I want my desktop apps to be dense and feature rich professional applications. My phone apps are relatively simple tools. No reason not to share the same codebase, with extra tools and UI widgets shown depending on whether they run on Mac or iDevices. Means more apps for Mac and more apps for iOS. And not with the crappy Electron wrappers.

Why? Has anyone asked for this? I want my desktop apps to be dense and feature rich professional applications. My phone apps are relatively simple tools. I don’t understand why.

isostatic 8y ago

I had this discussion with someone yesterday, who was attempting to recreate a final cut pro news editing workflow, but do it on an iphone. I still have no idea why. Just because you can bang a nail in with a screwdriver, it doesn't mean you should when you've got a perfectly good hammer.

post_break 8y ago
People love to take an iPad and force it to replace their ipad and be like "See, I can do all my work on my iPad, you just need 23 apps, and a few cheats and dongles to make it work." I don't understand it. I have a macbook pro, I have an iPad. Trying to force one to replace the other just doesn't work.

TheCoreh 8y ago

Personally, I would love if my phone apps were dense and feature rich professional applications, too. A lot of times I want to do something and it feels like the apps are holding me back just for the sake of being excessively simple. I've had this feeling on both Android and iOS

MobileVet 8y ago
Seriously asking, was this sarcasm? I can see feature rich iPad apps... but is the phone meant for more than quick glances?
- TheCoreh 8y ago
  It was not sarcasm. Sometimes quick glances can involve advanced tasks too. Or sometimes I'm on the go, with no tablet or computer and I still want to do something advanced, even if the phone screen is small. Besides there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to hook up my phone to an external display/mouse and get a full desktop experience. (Samsung is ahead of the pack in this, but the apps are still "mobile" versions that are not as fully fledged as their desktop counterparts)
  - MobileVet 8y ago
    Cool, thanks.
laythea 8y ago
Erm, Unfortunately, I suspect it will be that the professional apps will be (and are being) dumbed down.
iambateman 8y ago
I agree. Snapchat is great news for this desire. Eventually niche, high-use apps will reach degrees of complexity of which we can only dream right now.

cujo 8y ago

My hunch is that this isn't intended to just let iOS apps run on the desktop, but to allow developers to slap different UIs on their logic. It likely is more of a win for desktop devs as they'll presumably have an easier way to get their apps to iOS, or perhaps for game devs to have fewer requirements to port games.

frou_dh 8y ago

> Why? Has anyone asked for this? [...] I don’t understand why. There has probably been a decline in companies wanting to bother expending the effort to produce a separate AppKit version of their application solely to be able to target macOS. If an AppKit version is off the table, then between: - No app - A web app - An Electron app - A Marzipan app The Marzipan paradigm suddenly seems more appealing to Apple and Cocoa-faithful end users.

hrktb 8y ago

This is not just about desktop and phone though. I ask my iPad apps to be as dense and powerful as my desktop apps. In particular, the screen sizes are mostly similar now, processing power is on the same ballpark, and if anything the iPad has more potential than the laptop from a design perspective. So macOS <-> iPad parity. Then there's no technical reason to not have iPhone <-> iPad parity. You end up with the chain desktop <-> iPad <-> iPhone

coldtea 8y ago

>Why? Has anyone asked for this? I am asking for this. >I want my desktop apps to be dense and feature rich professional applications. My phone apps are relatively simple tools. No reason not to share the same codebase, with extra tools and UI widgets shown depending on whether they run on Mac or iDevices. Means more apps for Mac and more apps for iOS. And not with the crappy Electron wrappers.