What's the difference between 'Apple' and 'Universal' binary apps?

[satcomer]

Aren't Apple apps more efficient than Universal apps?

Not really! Apple make Universal applications so they play it still on Intel Mac Pro! I will expect this until about a year after the Mac Pro is replaced with Silicon chips (I tend to think Pro 2 M2 chips in new Mac Pro)

 

[theluggage]

Thank you. Out of interest though, why would this be the case for apps they are the same on both Intel and AS? For instance the Adobe ‘Apple’ binary apps are, from what I can tell, identical to the Intel counterparts. Why would they be Apple and not Universal?

For most applications, the source code is identical between Intel and AS (even if something has to be revised for AS, that can usually be done without breaking it for Intel). The binaries are created automatically by the compiler, and whether you get an "Intel", "Apple" or "Universal" binary is just a checkbox in XCode. A Universal binary will be bigger, because it contains both the Intel version and the Apple Silicon versions.

A Universal app is the simplest to distribute because you get one App that works anywhere & is foolproof. But it will take more disc space and take longer to download.

Or, you can produce two separate versions of the "same" App and offer one for Intel and one for AS. They'll take up less disc space and download quicker, but users need to pick the right one.

Or you can write your own installer/auto-update system that automatically detects what type of system you are on and downloads the correct version. Which will reduce disk usage and download size and make it foolproof.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Or, you can produce two separate versions of the "same" App and offer one for Intel and one for AS. They'll take up less disc space and download quicker, but users need to pick the right one.

If a developer could simply compile two versions of the same app, why was Universal developed? Just for efficiency?

 

[theluggage]

If a developer could simply compile two versions of the same app, why was Universal developed? Just for efficiency?

In most cases it's far more straightforward and convenient only to have a single app that runs on both platforms. Think of the typical "download this disc image, open it & drag the App to your Applications folder" routine. The extra disc space used by the 'fat' binary isn't usually an issue when people are choosing their storage based on how many hours of 4k video it can hold... Most apps contain a lot of stuff apart from the binary - icons, resource files, data files, so it doesn't even double the size of the app.

You wouldn't produce separate Intel and Apple apps without some good reason (e.g. if the app was particularly bloat-y or you were using an installer program that can automatically pick the correct binary).