Seriously starting to become a joke, where are the M1 Mac iOS, iPadOS apps.

[gank41]

Nope, other way around.

View attachment 1731948

Ok, fair enough. But everything else still applies. This communication is for the developer, not for non-developers on their home page or a marketing page saying it’s for everyone. They’re still giving the developers the option to choose. Now, if there was an Apple commercial touting this as a feature, absolutely! Everyone should complain.

Change Enable to Disable in my post, and all points remain valid. You could argue that it’s bad on the developers that have pulled their app from the App Store. But maybe be happy said app is still even being worked on at all? I’ve found a ton of iPad apps that are just garbage. Apps that haven’t been updated in a year and a half, and there they are on my Mac App Store just waiting for me to not want to use them because of the poor experience.

 

[gank41]

Speaking as someone with an M1 MacBook Air, Apple today seems to yank things from users very quickly. They'll probably block it from running at all in a couple M-series generations.

Only if you update/upgrade to the macOS version that does it. There’s a possibility they could block it server side, but I’m sure if we get to that point someone will find a way around it.

 

[ssgbryan]

The four greatest words in the English language are:

I told you so......

Those of us that have been involved with software development told the "True Believers" that they weren't going to get all of those apps immediately. And of course, we were shouted down for pointing out the obvious.

Don't expect to see your favorite iOS or iPad apps for at least a year or so. Apple is at the chicken and egg point right now. Software development is a multi-year process, and it is unrealistic to expect any software house to just drop what they are doing to enable their iFart app to run on the M1. Even moreso now that Apple no longer releases how many macs they sell per quarter. It isn't personal, it is business.

AFA Rosetta 2 - don't be surprised if the last OS that runs it stays on a fairly significant number of machines long after Apple removes it from MacOS. About 25% of the Mac user base hung onto 10.6.8 long after 10.8 was replaced. I didn't replace it until the release of 10.12. (Thanks Adobe!).

 

[spiderman0616]

The four greatest words in the English language are:

I told you so......

Those of us that have been involved with software development told the "True Believers" that they weren't going to get all of those apps immediately. And of course, we were shouted down for pointing out the obvious.

Don't expect to see your favorite iOS or iPad apps for at least a year or so. Apple is at the chicken and egg point right now. Software development is a multi-year process, and it is unrealistic to expect any software house to just drop what they are doing to enable their iFart app to run on the M1. Even moreso now that Apple no longer releases how many macs they sell per quarter. It isn't personal, it is business.

AFA Rosetta 2 - don't be surprised if the last OS that runs it stays on a fairly significant number of machines long after Apple removes it from MacOS. About 25% of the Mac user base hung onto 10.6.8 long after 10.8 was replaced. I didn't replace it until the release of 10.12. (Thanks Adobe!).

Yep--my company was not sufficiently prepared when Lion removed the first Rosetta. It broke a bunch of our software. I was a lowly support person at the time. The hard part was not taking calls from Mac users asking how they could run the software on Lion starting on DAY ONE of public availability. For those users, we had a bare-bones beta ready to go.

No, the hard part was taking calls from Mac users who were really mad that their only two options were to either upgrade to Lion and use our crappy beta, or not upgrade and stay on the old stuff. They did NOT want to wait up upgrade to Lion, and we got an earful about it every day on the phones.

But going back to your original thought--fully agree. Even Apple is calling this a "2 year transition". It's not like they went up on stage with a "Mission Accomplished" banner up on the wall behind them.

 

[richinaus]

Yep--my company was not sufficiently prepared when Lion removed the first Rosetta. It broke a bunch of our software. I was a lowly support person at the time. The hard part was not taking calls from Mac users asking how they could run the software on Lion starting on DAY ONE of public availability. For those users, we had a bare-bones beta ready to go.

No, the hard part was taking calls from Mac users who were really mad that their only two options were to either upgrade to Lion and use our crappy beta, or not upgrade and stay on the old stuff. They did NOT want to wait up upgrade to Lion, and we got an earful about it every day on the phones.

But going back to your original thought--fully agree. Even Apple is calling this a "2 year transition". It's not like they went up on stage with a "Mission Accomplished" banner up on the wall behind them.

Apple did say that indeed but also gave the impression everything was easy.
So a lot of consumers will not understand why there are delays in them being able to use the software.

I have had people getting angry at me for saying my Intel 16" MBP is currently better than the M1. My reasoning is I can use all the apps I need, whereas on the M1 I can't. The computer can be as fast as you like, but if the apps don't work then it is a paperweight.

The pro users who are a little more specialised in their work should understand all this more, but those who just use Apple apps and do 'basic' computing simply won't.

 

[spiderman0616]

Apple did say that indeed but also gave the impression everything was easy.
So a lot of consumers will not understand why there are delays in them being able to use the software.

I have had people getting angry at me for saying my Intel 16" MBP is currently better than the M1. My reasoning is I can use all the apps I need, whereas on the M1 I can't. The computer can be as fast as you like, but if the apps don't work then it is a paperweight.

The pro users who are a little more specialised in their work should understand all this more, but those who just use Apple apps and do 'basic' computing simply won't.

Again though--just because it's easy to make the conversion doesn't mean that a developer SHOULD make that conversion. 1) Maybe they just don't have the resources to invest in making their app acceptable on such a small percentage of Macs out in the wild. 2) Maybe their app just truly doesn't make sense on a Mac. 3) Maybe they already sell a popular Mac specific version--I had to buy all my Affinity stuff twice because of this, and the Mac versions are significantly different than the iPad versions.

At the moment, mobile app compatibility is great to have for some specific things I use, such as Apple Arcade games, LumaFusion, etc. I was happy to re-buy the Affinity Suite because I love Serif and they deserve to double-dip in my opinion. Looking through my LaunchPad, everything else I use already had a better/specific option ready to go on Mac, or had a web based option for Mac and eschewed the app format altogether.

Big shifts like this don't happen overnight. They are never without their growing pains. But this is the first time I have ever seen an architecture shift happen this smoothly, even with its warts.

 

[Acidsplat]

Only if you update/upgrade to the macOS version that does it. There’s a possibility they could block it server side, but I’m sure if we get to that point someone will find a way around it.

I'm still hoping there's an iOS app installation workaround that comes out but it will probably take as long as a "jailbreak" method would take.

 

[richinaus]

Again though--just because it's easy to make the conversion doesn't mean that a developer SHOULD make that conversion. 1) Maybe they just don't have the resources to invest in making their app acceptable on such a small percentage of Macs out in the wild. 2) Maybe their app just truly doesn't make sense on a Mac. 3) Maybe they already sell a popular Mac specific version--I had to buy all my Affinity stuff twice because of this, and the Mac versions are significantly different than the iPad versions.

At the moment, mobile app compatibility is great to have for some specific things I use, such as Apple Arcade games, LumaFusion, etc. I was happy to re-buy the Affinity Suite because I love Serif and they deserve to double-dip in my opinion. Looking through my LaunchPad, everything else I use already had a better/specific option ready to go on Mac, or had a web based option for Mac and eschewed the app format altogether.

Big shifts like this don't happen overnight. They are never without their growing pains. But this is the first time I have ever seen an architecture shift happen this smoothly, even with its warts.

I dont think we are disagreeing here.

I am also impressed by the shift in architecture, and how many apps are working great. However they are the Mainstream apps. I mentioned that the more specialised apps are going to take longer, which is fine and understandable.

 

[ADGrant]

But you just said developers are in the business of making money. If they're not porting iOS/iPadOS apps to MacOS, then they're making a business decision.

You happen to think that they're lazy, which is honestly, a little laughable.


Even porting x86 apps to native ARM64 binaries is a business decision. And how fast should they port it over? That's also a business decision.

You are correct, porting Mac x86 apps to native ARM64 binaries is a business decision. It's a decision to either stay in the Mac app business or abandon the platform. A x86 only strategy is not a viable one for a Mac developer going forward.

OTOH An iOS developer can chose to ignore the Mac platform as long as they wish to. If they do wish to support the Mac they should probably use Catalyst to build a universal binary that also supports the x86 Macs. There are a lot more of those in use right now.

 

[xraydoc]

I just downloaded a bunch of iPad apps and one iPhone app that will be handy on my MBA.

- 6 apps of reference material for work.
- app for monitoring output from my solar panels.
- the remote start app for my car (iPhone app).

 

[Ubuntu]

The M1 macs have been out for a while now and iOS, iPadOS apps on the Mac App Store are still nowhere to be seen, these so called developers need a kick up the backside, if it continues this way, apple should make it mandatory if you have a iOS, iPadOS app it has to be compatible with the M1 Mac App Store. ?‍♂️

That would be a fantastic way of pissing off the developers. Even though I intend to make my iOS app support M1 I wouldn’t force that at all.

 

[1madman1]

But considering Rosetta 1’s life cycle lasted what, close to 10 years? I’m pretty confident Rosetta 2 will be with us for some time.

2006 (launch of 10.4) through 2011 (last update of 10.6) is not 10 years.

 

[OldCorpse]

It would all be easier if all developers were clear on wheather their apps worked with M1 macs or not, or only under Rosetta 2 or whatnot. I’m not even looking for them to commit to any timetable. Just “current version does/doesn’t work on AS”.

Instead, you get situations where you install an app, and it doesn’t run. Hate mystery meat.

 

[ADGrant]

It would all be easier if all developers were clear on wheather their apps worked with M1 macs or not, or only under Rosetta 2 or whatnot. I’m not even looking for them to commit to any timetable. Just “current version does/doesn’t work on AS”.

Instead, you get situations where you install an app, and it doesn’t run. Hate mystery meat.

I think part of the confusion is people are conflating two distinct issues, M1 Support for MacOS Applications and Mac support for iOS applications. They are completely separate concerns.

If you have an Intel Mac and are considering migrating to an M1 Mac, it is very important to know which of the applications you depend on already support the M1 natively and for those that do not, when they will. If the developer does not have plans to support the M1, its time to consider migrating away from their application.

OTOH Running iOS applications is just a nice to have and an iOS app developer genuinely interested in supporting MacOS will use Catalyst to support both Intel and M1 Macs. IMHO, I don’t think there are enough M1 Macs yet to make supporting just them worth the trouble.

Buying an M1 Mac to run iOS apps is not really a sensible choice right now. If you need or want to run iOS apps on a “laptop”, the best choice right now is a 12.9” iPad Pro with a Magic keyboard. Unfortunately that is more expensive than a M1 MBA so I would at least wait until an A14 based device is released.

 

[antipodean]

I think part of the confusion is people are conflating two distinct issues, M1 Support for MacOS Applications and Mac support for iOS applications. They are completely separate concerns.

If you have an Intel Mac and are considering migrating to an M1 Mac, it is very important to know which of the applications you depend on already support the M1 natively and for those that do not, when they will. If the developer does not have plans to support the M1, its time to consider migrating away from their application.

OTOH Running iOS applications is just a nice to have and an iOS app developer genuinely interested in supporting MacOS will use Catalyst to support both Intel and M1 Macs. IMHO, I don’t think there are enough M1 Macs yet to make supporting just them worth the trouble.

Buying an M1 Mac to run iOS apps is not really a sensible choice right now. If you need or want to run iOS apps on a “laptop”, the best choice right now is a 12.9” iPad Pro with a Magic keyboard. Unfortunately that is more expensive than a M1 MBA so I would at least wait until an A14 based device is released.

I think this is exactly right. While it is tempting to imagine that the arrival of M1 Macs provides a greater incentive for iOS developers to port their apps to macOS (or at least makes doing so easier), the reality is that the absolute numbers of M1 Macs is still on the low side. If there is a good reason for a particular app to exist on macOS, better for the developer to make a proper macOS version as a universal binary and get potential sales from both Intel and Apple Silicon Mac owners.

Tweaking an existing iPadOS app to run better on an M1 Mac (e.g. improving mouse & keyboard support) could have the perverse effect (from the developer's perspective) of harming sales of a proper Mac version further down the line. That is because owners of the iPadOS version will simply install that version on their M1 Mac. This could explain why so many developers have opted their iPadOS apps out of M1 support (i.e. to avoid cannibalising sales of macOS versions now or in the future).

 

[Rafterman]

I think this is exactly right. While it is tempting to imagine that the arrival of M1 Macs provides a greater incentive for iOS developers to port their apps to macOS (or at least makes doing so easier), the reality is that the absolute numbers of M1 Macs is still on the low side. If there is a good reason for a particular app to exist on macOS, better for the developer to make a proper macOS version as a universal binary and get potential sales from both Intel and Apple Silicon Mac owners.

Tweaking an existing iPadOS app to run better on an M1 Mac (e.g. improving mouse & keyboard support) could have the perverse effect (from the developer's perspective) of harming sales of a proper Mac version further down the line. That is because owners of the iPadOS version will simply install that version on their M1 Mac. This could explain why so many developers have opted their iPadOS apps out of M1 support (i.e. to avoid cannibalising sales of macOS versions now or in the future).

But the vast majority of iOS apps do not have, or ever will have, a "proper" Mac version. Adding MacOS support to an iOS app can only help sales of the iOS app for a large majority of developers.

 

[Maconplasma]

But the vast majority of iOS apps do not have, or ever will have, a "proper" Mac version. Adding MacOS support to an iOS app can only help sales of the iOS app for a large majority of developers.

I don't see how this can be a bad thing. For the Developer a sale is a sale. I mean people here go through such great lengths to install MacOS on unsupported Macs without care that they won't get all the functions and since it's hacking an install via DosDude the install ends in not always very stable and reliable performance. Being able to at least run some iOS apps on the Mac helps increase the functionality of what you can do on a Mac.

 

[jdb8167]

I don't see how this can be a bad thing. For the Developer a sale is a sale. I mean people here go through such great lengths to install MacOS on unsupported Macs without care that they won't get all the functions and since it's hacking an install via DosDude the install ends in not always very stable and reliable performance. Being able to at least run some iOS apps on the Mac helps increase the functionality of what you can do on a Mac.

Not really true. You can easily make a sale that costs you more than you make on it. I've had a situation in the past (not iOS) where a single user of my software took up multiple hours in a week. We eventually refunded their money and got them a copy of our competitors software. It was easily a win for us.

In the case of iPadOS apps running on M1 hardware, it is not necessarily seamless. People can leave negative reviews that hurt your placement in the App Store and hinder future sales. Developers should work to fix those problems but I can see that many iOS & iPadOS are not really Mac users. They only use Macs and Xcode to develop their apps. These developers probably don't have an M1 Mac to test on. Why take the chance that Mac users dislike the limitations of your iOS app when the odds of bringing in enough money seems low.

A conservative decision is to just turn off supporting M1 Macs until you have time to get an M1 Mac and time to test. I hope that the number of iPadOS apps running on M1 increases in the future but you can't blame developers for not wanting to take the chance unless they are already invested in the Mac ecosystem.

 

[Rafterman]

I don't see how this can be a bad thing. For the Developer a sale is a sale. I mean people here go through such great lengths to install MacOS on unsupported Macs without care that they won't get all the functions and since it's hacking an install via DosDude the install ends in not always very stable and reliable performance. Being able to at least run some iOS apps on the Mac helps increase the functionality of what you can do on a Mac.

I used to do the Hackintosh route 15 years ago. I actually got everything to work on a Dell L attitude, even the broadband cellular modem built into it working. But it was a PITA, so I eventually said "screw it,I'll just buy a Macnook".

 

[gank41]

A great iPadOS app experience could be a crappy macOS app experience, and that will be reflected in the reviews & ratings, which will absolutely impact the developers sales.

 

[Maconplasma]

Not really true. You can easily make a sale that costs you more than you make on it.

Uh that's not uncommon. The video game industry is precisely doing this. As a business they know what it takes to make money and the hardware alone doesn't cut it.

I've had a situation in the past (not iOS) where a single user of my software took up multiple hours in a week. We eventually refunded their money and got them a copy of our competitors software. It was easily a win for us.

That's your unique situation. If that's a common occurrence for some developers then maybe they are in the wrong business.

In the case of iPadOS apps running on M1 hardware, it is not necessarily seamless. People can leave negative reviews that hurt your placement in the App Store and hinder future sales.

Oh you mean like what Macrumors members constantly do to Apple when Apple releases new products? These same members here haven't even touched the product before trashing it.

Developers should work to fix those problems but I can see that many iOS & iPadOS are not really Mac users.

Of course there are more Windows users with iPads and iPhones, simply because Windows has more market penetration. But your post is almost suggesting that Apple customers generally don't use Macs, which is certainly not true.

They only use Macs and Xcode to develop their apps. These developers probably don't have an M1 Mac to test on.

This is downright ridiculous. It's not like an M1 Air is uncommon to own, especially when developers are running a business. They need to buy the tools for the trade. Kind of an odd way that you're excusing developers.

Why take the chance that Mac users dislike the limitations of your iOS app when the odds of bringing in enough money seems low.

Precisely, and with this mentality the Mac will never gain any traction in the market. You almost sound like it's a waste of time to develop for the Mac. Your post is quite annoying.

A conservative decision is to just turn off supporting M1 Macs until you have time to get an M1 Mac and time to test.

Oh yeah because it takes a long time to buy an M1. I happen to know a few small-time developers and they instantly jumped on the M1 Air and the M1 Mini to get their apps developed for the system ASAP. Your entire post is Anti-Mac that I have no idea why you're even here on this thread. SMH.

I hope that the number of iPadOS apps running on M1 increases in the future but you can't blame developers for not wanting to take the chance unless they are already invested in the Mac ecosystem.

I absolutely will blame developers. When I'm paying money for a developer's app I expect service, just like people here expect service from Apple when they spend money on Macs. Let's leave it at that because I cannot and will not spend another 5 seconds talking with Anti-Mac people here. ?

 

[Maconplasma]

A great iPadOS app experience could be a crappy macOS app experience, and that will be reflected in the reviews & ratings, which will absolutely impact the developers sales.

Coulda Woulda Shoulda. No way to know unless the application is created for people to try. It's silly to just decide that it COULD be a crappy MacOS app experience. You do realize the developer can still create the app and test it right? That's what they're supposed to do, just like Apple is supposed to test software before release.

 

[gank41]

Coulda Woulda Shoulda. No way to know unless the application is created for people to try. It's silly to just decide that it COULD be a crappy MacOS app experience. You do realize the developer can still create the app and test it right? That's what they're supposed to do, just like Apple is supposed to test software before release.

Yeah, they can test their own app and find that the code in place works perfectly on an iPad and maybe doesn’t even launch at all on a Mac. And then when they try getting help from Apple’s documentation, they find nothing relating to their issue. Then they submit for support, and wait. And wait. And wait.

I mean, this is all very logical and based in common sense. I’m not sure how why this escalated as it did, other than the typical “want want gimme gimme” from people.

 

[Maconplasma]

Yeah, they can test their own app and find that the code in place works perfectly on an iPad and maybe doesn’t even launch at all on a Mac. And then when they try getting help from Apple’s documentation, they find nothing relating to their issue. Then they submit for support, and wait. And wait. And wait.

I mean, this is all very logical and based in common sense. I’m not sure how why this escalated as it did, other than the typical “want want gimme gimme” from people.

LOL this is exactly what this forum is made of. I waaa waaa waaa Apple to do this with MacOS. Customers should expect the same from developers. The developers are running a business selling apps (those that charge for them) and they need to realize they are not in the position to decide IF they want to make apps for the Mac because there will always be another developer with a competing app that will happily put their product out there and it's a great possibility that it will be successful simply because some developers decide not to go through the trouble.

Newsflash ALL business types run into parts of the required work that won't be fun to deal with. Nobody would be in business (including Apple) if they expect every aspect of the business to be smooth sailing. That's just not realistic. Deal with the issues when running a business or don't be in that type of business at all. Simple as that. Because I most certainly can spend my money elsewhere on developers that give a damn. That's why I use Pixelmator instead of Photoshop and various other well-made Mac apps from smaller companies.

 

[dmccloud]

LOL this is exactly what this forum is made of. I waaa waaa waaa Apple to do this with MacOS. Customers should expect the same from developers. The developers are running a business selling apps (those that charge for them) and they need to realize they are not in the position to decide IF they want to make apps for the Mac because there will always be another developer with a competing app that will happily put their product out there and it's a great possibility that it will be successful simply because some developers decide not to go through the trouble.

Newsflash ALL business types run into parts of the required work that won't be fun to deal with. Nobody would be in business (including Apple) if they expect every aspect of the business to be smooth sailing. That's just not realistic. Deal with the issues when running a business or don't be in that type of business at all. Simple as that. Because I most certainly can spend my money elsewhere on developers that give a damn. That's why I use Pixelmator instead of Photoshop and various other well-made Mac apps from smaller companies.

Here's the problem with your statement. The decision over which platforms to support is entirely the developer's choice, it is NOT something that you or Apple have the right to dictate the terms to. Some developers (especially those with very limited resources, of which there are many) can not afford to rush out and buy an M1 Mac, especially in the middle of a global pandemic where other sources of income may be few and far between. Not all iOS/iPad OS apps will translate well to Mac OS, especially those which rely on GPS (i.e. Pokemon Go) or the gyroscopic sensors because the Mac does not support those types of devices. Furthermore a touch-heavy interface for an app will not translate to Mac OS well because of the lack of touchscreen support within the OS. You "might" be able to connect a Wacom touchscreen tablet (such as the Cintiq series or Wacom One) and use that to replicate an iOS screen, but that is an expensive workaround to use certain iOS/iPad OS apps on your Mac as intended by the developers.