If there’s a single disappointment in the release of Apple’s first wave of M1 Macs, it’s the lackluster launch of iOS apps running inside of macOS. What should be an amazing unification of Apple’s platforms and a massive expansion of the Mac software base is, instead… kind of a non-event.

Running iOS apps on the Mac can be a little weird, it’s true. But it can sometimes be good. Unfortunately, a lot of interesting iOS apps just aren’t available at all, because their developers have removed them from the Mac side of the iOS App Store.

It’s not a great situation. It needs to get better. Here are some ways that might happen.

What developers can do

Though iOS app developers with the Apple silicon Developer Transition Kit could build their iOS apps for Mac and run them to get an idea how they’d perform on macOS, I understand that many developers didn’t do this, and others didn’t feel comfortable letting their iOS apps out into the wild without first giving them a try on a real M1 Mac. A lot of them opted to just stay on the safe side and opt their apps out.

Current version is v0.983 build 248 (April – 2021) AmigaLive is available for 64-bit Windows, MacOS and Linux. It works cross-platform and is packaged with the “FS-UAE/FS-UAE Launcher”.

1. The scripted nature of the art has made critics view it as an illegitimate sport, particularly in comparison to boxing, mixed martial arts, amateur wrestling, and the real sport itself, wrestling. No major promoter or wrestler denies that modern professional wrestling has predetermined match outcomes.
2. This will give the MAC the second-largest wrestling conference in the country behind the Eastern Intercollegiate Wrestling Conference, which has 16 teams, ahead of the Big 10 which has 14.

But I hope it’s a temporary situation. While iPad and iPhone apps have some quirks in a Mac context, they honestly work better than I expected. And I think users are probably more forgiving of quirks than perhaps developers are. I hope that perfect won’t be the enemy of good, and that users won’t be deprived of apps they love from iOS just because they’re not quite up to a developer’s very high standards.

What I’m hoping is that developers will look at how their iOS apps perform on the Mac and decide that they do want them there—and will be driven to improve them. Improving support for iPad features like cursors and keyboard shortcuts will make an app better on the Mac, too. And developers can go even further by embracing Catalyst, which lets those iOS apps run as full Mac apps, with a more normal menu bar and other Mac adaptations. (Apps running with Catalyst will also run on the installed base of Intel Macs, which will be a majority of Macs in operation for a few years yet.)

Finally, I’d encourage app developers to listen to their customers and understand that an iOS app might be a better option than the alternative. I’m so sick of being kicked to lousy web-based experiences on the Mac when there are excellent apps for those services on iOS. Even a slightly strange iOS experience, running in a standalone app, beats out keeping it in a Safari tab that I’ll invariably close by accident.

What Apple can do

This isn’t all on developers. If Apple wants to benefit from having iOS apps run on all future Mac hardware, it’s going to need to keep pushing.

Part of that push will need to come on the software side. Apple needs to continue to develop Catalyst and make it as easy as possible for iOS developers to make apps that work great both on iPads with the Magic Keyboard attached, and on Macs. The less work developers have to do to make their apps great across a wide range of Apple devices, the more likely they are to do the work.

Apple needs to bring across more of its own technologies, too. The Shortcuts app is a key way to automate functions on iOS, but it doesn’t exist on the Mac, and many iOS apps will be a little less functional until it does.

But Apple’s biggest impact can come with the decisions it makes about hardware. The reason some iOS apps feel weird on the Mac is that they were designed for touch, not for a cursor and keyboard. Introducing Macs with touchscreens won’t change the Mac’s status as a mouse-first operating system, but it will offer alternate modes of input—and open up better compatibility with some iOS apps.

And imagine if Apple made a two-in-one convertible laptop, with a screen that could be wrapped around the back to make it temporarily more like an iPad. A lot of users would love a laptop that could transform into a tablet from time to time—but the apps need to be there.

What users can do

Developers have it rough. They’ve spent the summer wrestling with some major changes in macOS Big Sur, plus the transition to Apple silicon. They deserve your respect and your politeness.

That said, if there’s an iOS app that you love that’s not available on the Mac, it’s worth politely contacting that developer. Explain to them—politely!—why you want to run that app on the Mac, and why it’s a superior option to whatever their Mac solution is today. The more demand developers hear, the more likely they are to prioritize bringing their iOS app to the Mac.

Another thing to keep in mind: Every iOS developer is a Mac user, because the only way to develop apps for iOS is to use Xcode. This means that most iOS developers aren’t going to look down on Mac users who want their favorite iOS apps to run on the Mac—because they probably do, too.

Finally, all of us need to be patient. It’s the very earliest days for Apple silicon on the Mac. I’ve talked to some developers who have been working on bringing their iOS apps to the Mac since the initial Mac Catalyst announcement in the summer of 2019—and they’re still not there. The first version of Catalyst was limited, and so many of them waited for the version in Big Sur. It takes time to do it right. I’m confident that more apps are on the way. But we all need a little patience.

Still, developers: If your app runs okay on the Mac and there’s no huge business reason to bar Mac users from using it, why not check that box? Chances are good that your customers will thank you for it.

When the world got its first glimpse of Mac OS X six months ago with the release of the Mac OS X beta, cheers erupted across the Internet . . . but not from who you might have expected. While the response from the Macintosh community was muted and many of the Apple faithful greeted OS X with trepidation, hard-core Unix geeks were thrilled. Looking past the candy-colored GUI, command-line partisans could find a solid Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) Unix implementation, complete with everything they’ve come to expect from a “real” multiuser, multitasking operating system. Suddenly, old-time hacks could count Mac OS among their favored few.

The changes made to OS X since the beta will only reinforce that enthusiasm. While users familiar with more mainstream Unix implementations face a handful of interface oddities, the heart of the system they know and love beats proudly underneath Apple’s shiny, polished skin.

The most obvious change since the beta is the inclusion of a whole range of traditional Unix development tools. Apple has done the Right Thing with OS X and shipped a C/C++ compiler, preprocessor, make, and debugger — all are either direct compiles of, or tweaks “based on,” the GNU versions of the programs. More obscure tools like yacc and lex have also made the cut, along with the must-have configuration management system CVS and the less useful but still popular RCS. These applications are important because they open a whole world of freely available software to OS X, right out of the box — everything from heavy-duty relational databases to housekeeping and system administration tools. Apple has honored a fundamental tenant of the Unix Way: If you’ve got a compiler, you’ve got everything.

For instance, the current version of MySQL — a popular (and enormous) implementation of most of the SQL spec — compiles on the final release of Mac OS X almost flawlessly. (There is one miscast assignment, and it can be corrected with a three-character change.) The database exercises a whole range of system features, including the C++ compiler, threading, and forking, and with the exception of the database replication tests, it all works perfectly. Why would you want a gigabyte-capable database on your desktop Mac? Why not? The possibilities are breathtaking, and suddenly open to the entire Mac community. In the Unix world, MySQL is used for everything from the simple storage of massive lists to dynamic Web serving, when the database is combined with the PHP language and the Apache Web server (both of which, handily, ship with OS X). The applications are endless.

Another example is Samba, a Unix implementation of Windows’ SMB protocol. It allows Windows workstations to use Unix boxes — and, now, Mac OS X boxes — as file and print servers. Half a million lines of Samba code compile without a single error on OS X. In fact, the only modification needed was in the configuration script, to tell it that “Darwin” is the equivalent of “FreeBSD.”

Pro Wrestling Is Real

This last point is significant because the operating system is a little schizophrenic about how it identifies itself — variously labeling the machine as either “Darwin” (Apple’s name for the nongraphical core of OS X) or “Mac OS X.” For example, the make program claims to have been created for “powerpc-apple-darwin1.0,” while the debugger was targeted to “powerpc-apple-macos10.” The uname command offers “Darwin” as the OS flavor and after an inevitable shake-out period, that will probably emerge as the consistent standard.

Mac OS X even includes a few neat tricks of its own, over and above what other popular Unix and Unix-like operating systems manage. The whole notion of bundled Frameworks — used to store multiple versions of shared libraries — is a clever improvement on the chaos that usually reigns after a system upgrade. By preserving older versions of the libraries, and in a much more coherent form than the Unix tradition allows, the OS becomes far more stable over time. OS X makes good use of these ideas to maintain its Java installation, for instance, while still providing the software in their standard Unix directories through symbolic links.

Another neat toy is the ability to invisibly use WebDAV URIs as filesystems, via the mount command. Using Web resources as storage space is old hat for Mac users, but it’s not a widespread practice on the Unix side of the fence.

This only reinforces the fact that OS X is a Macintosh operating system, first and foremost, and that Unix users will need to adapt to some oddities. In an effort to wedge some alien concepts into the Macintosh universe, Apple has made a few compromises to the purity of OS X’s Unix nature.

For instance, the most immediate difference between the operating system and true Unix is the presence of dozens of unexpected system directories, many more than in the beta, each with capitalized and whitespace-littered names. In addition to the familiar /etc and /dev and /tmp, Mac OS X offers /Users and /Volumes and /System and many, many others. These latter ones are Mac-centric folders, of course — including the whole bestiary of Bundles and other OS X-specific hoo-ha. And while they don’t reflect the traditional Unix filesystem structure (indeed, they supersede it in some cases), the purpose and function of each is pretty obvious, even to the uninitiated. Having to put quotes around filenames with spaces in them from the shell can take some practice, but preserving capitalization turns out not to be a problem: the OS X’s default filesystem is case-insensitive.

Wrestling Is Real Mac Os 11

And that is another startling difference between what OS X provides and what Unix users expect — /users is /Users is /USERS, makefile is Makefile is MAKEFILE. Under HFS+, names created with a specific capitalization have their appearance preserved, but any combination of upper- and lowercase can be used when referencing them. This has the potential to drive Unix users batty, as case-sensitivity has been a part of every significant Unix filesystem since the OS was created in 1969. Windows’ default, NTFS, presents the same behavior as OS X (to retain backward compatibility with MS-DOS) and HFS+ feels just as awkward to the Unix sensibility.

Wrestling Is Real Mac Os Catalina

And finally, a few of the applications shipped with OS X are less powerful than what is commonly available elsewhere. The nvi implementation of the vi text editor has been included, for example, instead of the more powerful vim. It’s a simple matter to download and compile vim, of course — you can do things like that when you’re running Unix — but why should you have to?

Wrestling Is Real Mac Os X

Customizing Unix applications is a relatively insignificant issue. Apple’s primary goal was to design an operating system for Mac users, and by all accounts they have succeeded wildly. All the underlying functionality of Unix — all the important bits — are present and accounted for, and the result is far and away the best Mac OS ever. The system provides every feature and functionality a Unix programmer could want, and provides all of it through a comfortable, well-worn API. Not only does this instantly offer Mac OS thousands of BSD-compatible programs (including some best-of-class offerings) but also lays the groundwork for a new and powerful generation of Mac-specific programs.

The Unix geeks have been mouthing the same line for twenty years now: that their OS honestly does make better programs — more flexible, more powerful, more robust. Macintosh users are about to find out just how right they are.

Wrestling Is Real Mac Os Catalina

Discuss this story and other Mac OS X items in our Mac OS X Forums.