Daring Fireball: Regarding the Idea of iPad Apps Running on Mac OS X | Hacker News Reader

Daring Fireball: Regarding the Idea of iPad Apps Running on Mac OS X

daringfireball.net

53 pointsbarredo13 comments

In the iPhone HIG, there's a section on bringing a desktop application to iOS[1]. The entire HIG spends a fair amount of time talking about the different needs of mobile and desktop users. Until Apple releases a document tailored for them, any iOS developers who are planning to port their app to the Mac might want to reread the HIG, this time looking out for what's expected from a desktop app.

[1] http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/UserEx...

For anyone who is interested, this is the corresponding HIG document for Mac OS: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserEx...

(Easiest way to read both of these is to click the "PDF" button in the top-right to download the whole document.)

Couldn't have said it better myself. Really think Gruber's response is very astute and spot on. iPad apps that work exactly the same on OSX? Um ya don't think so.

The key point being that Apple's strategy is the exact opposite of write-once run-anywhere

I don't think so. Right now you can write universal applications for iPhone/iPad changing the view controllers, resources (textures) with the same underlying core code. I think that Apple next big step will be an unified architecture which will allow developers to build cross-platform applications that will run on iPhone/iPad/Mac using an hybrid UIKit/AppKit. Maybe in OS X 10.8, time will tell.

Yea, but that's not what most mean by "write once run anywhere." I don't consider having to write separate view controllers for iPhone and iPad "write once run anywhere."

In fact that's not much different than many existing cross platform applications that have a platform agnostic core with a layer of platform specific UI code on top.

"Write once, run anywhere" is a phrase that historically has referred to multiple platforms by multiple vendors--that is, platforms other than ones maintained by a single company. That is, not just Macs and iOS. Even if they do unify their development interface for all of their platforms, that still will be far from WORA, since I don't see them coming up with an easy way to port their apps to Android or Windows or Ubuntu anytime soon.

While you didn't use that phrase yourself, the implication that it could be applied to Apple's offerings reeks of co-option to me--I think Gruber's right about that, since Apple appears to focus on providing the best experience for each individual device (and devices from other vendors aren't even an issue for them--why should they be?). That said, however, I think you're right in that it would certainly be sensible from their perspective to make it easier for developers of one of their platforms to pick up development for their other ones.

Actually - good point.

Historically Next/OpenStep ran on Windows and there were always rumours that Cocoa for Windows (aka Yellowbox) would be released. And there was GNUStep, which was an independent open-source clone of OpenStep. I wonder if they have maintained Yellowbox in the same way as they maintained the Intel version of Mac OSX?

Meanwhile, Apple's Windows UI strategy with iTunes is to mimic the Mac as much as possible - presumably to try and ease things for people if/when they switch.

But the net effect is that their Windows software is just awful - proof that one UI to rule them all doesn't work.

I was thinking the same when Jobs presented but thought I was being a bit rash and naive. I guess not.

I suspect this will remain true right up to the point at which Macs start shipping with touchscreens.

During the latest keynote Jobs said that this is not going to happen. It is kind of obvious too, just do the following experiment: Pretend your laptop or desktop screen is multitouch and start touching and "moving" things just for 1 minute (time yourself). It is exhausting.

Or think back to the last time you fiddled with a monitor's settings for more than a few seconds, via the bezel buttons and on-screen display.

That's not exactly what he said. He said that touch surfaces want to be horizontal.

Here's my (purely speculative) take:

Fullscreen apps in OS X are a transitional component. Future Macs are going to be dual mode. Remember the patent Apple filed with an iMac that converted from vertical to horizontal (1)? So imagine you've got an iMac on your desk. You're working away in OS X as you always would with a mouse and keyboard. You pull your iMac toward you and it pivots to a horizontal orientation. Sensors in the hinge signal the app to switch to fullscreen mode and you begin using the app through a touch interface using your fingers. When you're done, you return the display to the vertical position and move back to your mouse and keyboard.

My level of certainty isn't terribly high here, because I think there are ergonomic challenges to a pivoting touch screen device that sits on a desk. When using my iPad, the ideal position is definitively not at desk height. The device needs to be very, very close to you in order to avoid the fatigue associated with reaching. A pivoting iMac is still going to require some reach.

I'm also realistic about the fact that not every patent Apple files makes it to production. It's just some idle pondering.

1 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-fi...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com