> The next generation of MacBooks - whatever they're called - will be an evolution of ipad, using ARM hardware and running an iOS-derived OS.
No they won't. I mean, it's conceivable that they could be using ARM chips (though Apple would need a strategy for emulating x86_64 in this case, like they did for PowerPC->i386), but there's no way they're going to be running iOS.
Apple is slowly expanding the capabilities of the iPad, that's certainly true, but it's not even close to replacing a laptop for all tasks. iPads are becoming usable for more and more tasks, but there's a very long way to go before the laptop is obsolete, and I don't expect iPad to ever actually go that far (if it did, it would just end up being a laptop). Even given laptop hardware, iOS is not set up to be able to replace macOS for all tasks.
Even ignoring all that, Catalyst is if anything evidence to the contrary, that Apple sees macOS as being very much alive and wants to encourage more apps to be developed for it. Catalyst isn't just iOS apps on macOS, it's also tools to extend your iOS codebase to adopt macOS-specific features, like multiple overlapping windows of arbitrary sizes, menu bars, a mouse¹, titlebar controls, and more.
¹I know iOS 13 now supports using a mouse on iPadOS, but it's just an accessibility feature that looks to the app like a touch, it doesn't e.g. support hover states, or encourage smaller click targets, or anything like that.
>No they won't. I mean, it's conceivable that they could be using ARM chips (though Apple would need a strategy for emulating x86_64 in this case, like they did for PowerPC->i386)
Exactly. Apple has proven it can do emulation very successfully - it's already done it twice (M68K->PPC->x86)
> there's no way they're going to be running iOS
I didn't say "running iOS", I said "an iOS-derived OS".
>Catalyst is if anything evidence to the contrary, that Apple sees macOS as being very much alive and wants to encourage more apps to be developed for it.
That's the other interpretation. I don't see it personally: the central thrust of the article is that Apple is really good at gentle evolution. MacOS has seen no meaningful innovation in years. iOS, by comparison, has evolved significantly. It's been steadily gaining more features that move it towards being a laptop-capable OS (e.g. multi-tasking). It's certainly not there yet - but that's the trajectory.
To be clear, when I said "next generation macbooks" I didn't mean "next revision". It's probably several revisions away and it'll happen incrementally.
Still, of course, it's just opinion :). Thanks for sharing yours.
If iOS gains enough features to replace macOS, then it will just be macOS again. iOS is gaining new features, but it's still a rather constrained and touch-focused environment. For example, you can do split-screen on iPadOS, but you can't do arbitrary overlapping windows. Instead they're focusing on ways to save "scenes" and switch between apps, but each app still owns the portion of the screen it's been given (and those portions are very constrained; full-size, half, 1/3rd, or a slightly shorter 1/3rd in a slide-over; and the 1/3rd size is literally supposed to be your iPhone UI). They added mouse to iPadOS but strictly as an accessibility feature, and apps can't even detect that the mouse is there, let alone add mouse-related functionality. The file system is still heavily locked down. There's still no process spawning or any indication that Apple will ever allow process spawning (which is a hard blocker for a lot of developer tools). iPads support external screens, but not as the primary display (that's basically just for projecting stuff, e.g. presentations or photos).
Ultimately, there's no point in relaxing these restrictions for an "iOS-derived" laptop OS. The primary argument in favor of unifying macOS and iOS was the fact that iOS has a lot of developer momentum and that way you can use iOS apps on macOS, but that's exactly what Catalyst gives us already. Apple is working towards unifying stuff at the developer API level (e.g. Catalyst, SwiftUI, etc) but at the OS level macOS and iOS are quite distinct and will stay that way.
> Apple would need a strategy for emulating x86_64 in this case
Depending on how they roll out this transition they might not need x86_64 emulation. It is a very useful feature, but not for everybody. I am pretty sure most of the current programs distributed through MacApp store could be ported to ARM relatively easily, especially if they depend mostly on system frameworks.
Open source CLI and developer tools already run well on ARM as ARM linux computers are nothing new.
Big players such as Adobe do already know how to build ARM applications as they already ship them on iOS and presumably would have a good head start to port their flagship programs.
Finally I am convinced that internally Apple has already all of their software including macOS and Xcode running on ARM (OS X was running on Intel from the beginning, years before the transition).
With all of that, it is pretty conceivable that Apple would push out _a_ machine with an ARM chip, simply running an ARM build of macOS.
”Apple has proven it can do emulation very successfully - it's already done it twice (M68K->PPC->x86)”
In both cases, from a situation where the platform being emulated was seriously behind, performance-wise.
I don’t think they can maneuver themselves in that position for a x86 ⇒ ARM migration (not even given that they can tweak their ARM variant)
Luckily, I don’t think they would need emulation. Many of their customers don’t run anything else than Apple’s software or popular open source apps that would be migrated within a few days on their Macs.
The others will have to wait until the likes of Adobe have ported their software.
No they won't. I mean, it's conceivable that they could be using ARM chips (though Apple would need a strategy for emulating x86_64 in this case, like they did for PowerPC->i386), but there's no way they're going to be running iOS.
Apple is slowly expanding the capabilities of the iPad, that's certainly true, but it's not even close to replacing a laptop for all tasks. iPads are becoming usable for more and more tasks, but there's a very long way to go before the laptop is obsolete, and I don't expect iPad to ever actually go that far (if it did, it would just end up being a laptop). Even given laptop hardware, iOS is not set up to be able to replace macOS for all tasks.
Even ignoring all that, Catalyst is if anything evidence to the contrary, that Apple sees macOS as being very much alive and wants to encourage more apps to be developed for it. Catalyst isn't just iOS apps on macOS, it's also tools to extend your iOS codebase to adopt macOS-specific features, like multiple overlapping windows of arbitrary sizes, menu bars, a mouse¹, titlebar controls, and more.
¹I know iOS 13 now supports using a mouse on iPadOS, but it's just an accessibility feature that looks to the app like a touch, it doesn't e.g. support hover states, or encourage smaller click targets, or anything like that.