Apple's cross-platform app solution likely to debut in 2019, report says

Posted:
in Mac Software edited April 2018
According to a new report from well-connected blogger John Gruber, Apple's project to deliver macOS support to iOS apps will debut in 2019, not 2018 as previously guessed.

App Store Redesign


Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac, but said the feature will not be unveiled at this year's Worldwide Developers Conference.

"I'm nearly certain this project is not debuting at WWDC 2018 in June, and I doubt that 2018 was on the table in December," Gruber writes. "It's a 2019 thing, for MacOS 10.15 and iOS 13.1 I would set your expectations accordingly for this year's WWDC."

Word of the cross-platform app framework first leaked in December when Bloomberg reported on the project, saying it would launch sometime in 2018 as part of iOS 12 and macOS 10.14. A follow-up report from Axios seemingly confirmed a launch this year, saying the plan is to allow iOS apps -- iPad apps in particular -- to run natively on macOS with little or no input from developers.

The initial reports were painted in broad strokes and left much to the imagination. Gruber, citing "mostly second-hand" sources, fills in some of the blanks, saying the feature appears to be a type of declarative control API. Under such a system, developers would be able to declare an asset and assign it attributes rather than creating it procedurally.

As Gruber notes, the solution is not "inherently cross-platform." It does, however, suggest Apple is working to address API differences in iOS and macOS, allowing developers to more easily deploy apps that function on both platforms. The company could also be laying the groundwork for a true cross-platform user interface that integrates declarative control APIs.

Former Microsoft Windows division president Steven Sinofsky chimed in on Twitter, saying the process of cross-platforming is not as simple as adding an abstraction layer to an app or implementing a UI-abstracting framework. Indeed, developers still need to code operating system capabilities. If Apple were to integrate OS controls and capabilities into a new framework written for both iOS and macOS, or build a framework that integrates with existing resources, it could "make [cross-platforming] work," Sinofsky says.

Beyond a few tidbits regarding how the system might work, Gruber says the initiative is no longer referred to internally as "Marzipan," a codename mentioned in initial reports.

When, exactly, Apple intends to reveal the iOS-macOS framework remains to be seen, but developers will likely get a better idea of the company's plans come June.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 30
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 953member
    Given it's likely to be a many year rolling project, why not preview this year to cover very basic apps (ie Free apps provided by Banks and service providers), launch store early next expand to 80% potential in WWDC.
  • Reply 2 of 30
    Above_The_GodsAbove_The_Gods Posts: 5unconfirmed, member
    mattinoz said:
    Given it's likely to be a many year rolling project, why not preview this year to cover very basic apps (ie Free apps provided by Banks and service providers), launch store early next expand to 80% potential in WWDC.
    Bank apps are not "basic".
  • Reply 3 of 30
    ericthehalfbeeericthehalfbee Posts: 3,920member
    I still think iOS gets dropped altogether and iPhones/iPads will run macOS.
  • Reply 4 of 30
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 851member
    I think Marzipan codenamed project and these rumored projects don't have the same code name because they are different projects - and the people receiving these rumors are confusing the two.  The one reason why Marzipan is had fewer rumors is that it is a project of a similar secrecy to Swift.  What they are likely talking here is the less secret project (Apple has already acknowledged sort of that it is in the plans)... of PWA apps.  Two different technologies, two different aims (IMHO).
    edited April 2018 Soli
  • Reply 5 of 30
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,518member

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

    Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
    tmayStrangeDays
  • Reply 6 of 30
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 953member
    mattinoz said:
    Given it's likely to be a many year rolling project, why not preview this year to cover very basic apps (ie Free apps provided by Banks and service providers), launch store early next expand to 80% potential in WWDC.
    Bank apps are not "basic".
    They aren't exactly feature rich either, most I've seen don't even match the abilities of the banks own web interface and iPad versions tend to just use the extra space for pictures of cafe or mountains more than additional information or feature*. Sure there is complexity with security and data transport but that is behind the scenes not interface.

    *To be fair this applies to many apps and their iPad versions.
  • Reply 7 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,433member
    Rayz2016 said:

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

    Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
    I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

    For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

    We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

    Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
  • Reply 8 of 30
    croprcropr Posts: 871member
    mattinoz said:
    mattinoz said:
    Given it's likely to be a many year rolling project, why not preview this year to cover very basic apps (ie Free apps provided by Banks and service providers), launch store early next expand to 80% potential in WWDC.
    Bank apps are not "basic".
    They aren't exactly feature rich either, most I've seen don't even match the abilities of the banks own web interface and iPad versions tend to just use the extra space for pictures of cafe or mountains more than additional information or feature*. Sure there is complexity with security and data transport but that is behind the scenes not interface.

    *To be fair this applies to many apps and their iPad versions.
    But developing an universal app (macOs and iOS) is also a lot  more than just the UI, which might in fact be the easy part. iOS is a fully controlled environment, where apps are running in isolated environments.  On macOs this is a compete different story, you have multiple browser engines, fully multi user, drivers for extra hardware, different configuration options, ...
  • Reply 9 of 30
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,173member
    I still think iOS gets dropped altogether and iPhones/iPads will run macOS.
    You didn't so much read between the lines there as totally ignore the lines

  • Reply 10 of 30
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,835member
    I wonder if Marzipan (that name sounds far too Googlesque by the way lol) will be tied to newer hardware, namely the inclusion of Apple chips in newer Macs and won't in fact work on pure Intel Macs.
  • Reply 11 of 30
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,173member
    What Marzipan is, from my reading of Gruber is this: They are creating some kind of HTML based UI system which should both work on iOS and Mac and on any variation of iOS device without any special code for layout. Yes autolayout does that now but HTML, or HTML based code like JSX is more flexible. This is a reaction to react native and other forms of HTML based coding, which is getting more popular. 


    This is how you would render a button in react native, this is rendered down to a UIButton somewhere in the parser code. The Render function returns what looks like HTML ( technically JSX) which allows the coder to style the button using HTML/CSS type styling patterns. Apple doesnt want this to become the default for building on iOS as it will probably not use Apple design patterns but probably realises there are some advantages to HTML. 

    var Button = require('react-native-button');


    var ExampleComponent = React.createClass({

      render() {

        return (

          <Button

            style={{borderWidth: 1, borderColor: 'blue'}}

            onPress={this._handlePress}>

            Press Me!

          </Button>

        );

      },

      _handlePress(event) {

        console.log('Pressed!');

      },

    });

    edited May 2018
  • Reply 12 of 30
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,674member
    MacPro said:
    I wonder if Marzipan (that name sounds far too Googlesque by the way lol) will be tied to newer hardware, namely the inclusion of Apple chips in newer Macs and won't in fact work on pure Intel Macs.
    I'm sure this is taken into consideration. I still think an Apple CPU based Mac is coming soon. It's a nice way to transition apps over. 
  • Reply 13 of 30
    xbitxbit Posts: 224member
    asdasd said:
    This is how you would render a button in react native, this is rendered down to a UIButton somewhere in the parser code. The Render function returns what looks like HTML ( technically JSX) which allows the coder to style the button using HTML/CSS type styling patterns. Apple doesnt want this to become the default for building on iOS as it will probably not use Apple design patterns but probably realises there are some advantages to HTML. 
    Let's hope that Apple's solution doesn't have the performance bottlenecks of React Native.
  • Reply 14 of 30
    studiomusicstudiomusic Posts: 585member
    MacPro said:
    I wonder if Marzipan (that name sounds far too Googlesque by the way lol) will be tied to newer hardware, namely the inclusion of Apple chips in newer Macs and won't in fact work on pure Intel Macs.
    Probably more in homage to this Marzipan...


  • Reply 15 of 30
    Soli said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

    Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
    I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

    For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

    We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

    Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
    Soli, soli, soli...I have read articles here for many years and have found your comments to be sometimes insightful and informative - usually hilarious. I had to register this time to reply to your post.

    You are wrong.

    The Plus devices don’t upscale @2x to @3x at all. Until the iPhone X, @3x was a theoretical resolution - that was (and still is on Plus devices) a resolution that is rendered both by design and GPU at that exact size. At which point @3x ((1242 x 2208) portrait orientation) is downscaled to match the actual res of the plus device’s 1080 x 1920 screen real estate. (Think taking a hi-res photo and down-scaling to a smaller size, to fit a smaller frame)

    You couldn’t be more wrong, and for me it’s a point of contention, I am an iOS developer and love to read these kinds of articles as it affects my future in possibly positive or negative ways, we have an uncertain future and Apple are paving the way...You are a stockholder so maybe you should be more vocal on defending/attacking the articles that are more aimed at you as a stockholder/manipulator/kool aid drinker, and leave the basics (a blank Labrador got it) of how @3x works to those that understand it. And just to be clear whilst you have a misunderstanding of “theoretical res” on the plus devices, actual @3x res was already achieved by Apple with the iPhone X last year. Get out of your station and get with the program already. Get out of bed, get out of your pajamas and get a life. Just saying.
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 16 of 30
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,264member

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac, but said the feature will not be unveiled at this year's Worldwide Developers Conference.
    Are you high? Gruber confirmed nothing of the sort. I know you refuse to admit AI made a mistake and has this story wrong, but come on. Gruber said EXPLICITLY that he believes the project is NOT to "run iOS apps on Mac". So he certainly didn't confirm that's what the initiative is for. Let's revisit what he said:

    "The truth is that this effort by Apple is almost certainly not about cross-platform applications but instead cross-platform frameworksfor developers. It’s developer news, not user news."

    https://daringfireball.net/2017/12/marzipan

    and

    "WHAT IS IT? I don’t have extensive details, but basically it sounds like a declarative control API."

    https://daringfireball.net/2018/04/scuttlebutt_regarding_ui_project

    ...an API for cross-platform control use. Perhaps something like a markup language for declarative placement of UI controls. But he never said it's to "run iOS apps on Mac" and flat-out said that's likely wrong.

    So just stop. You're pushing a narrative that isn't supported by the facts you say they are. I know you guys aren't software developers, but would it kill you to contact one and have them translate the technical jargon for you?
    edited May 2018 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 17 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,433member
    Soli said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

    Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
    I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

    For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

    We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

    Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
    Soli, soli, soli...I have read articles here for many years and have found your comments to be sometimes insightful and informative - usually hilarious. I had to register this time to reply to your post.

    You are wrong.

    The Plus devices don’t upscale @2x to @3x at all. Until the iPhone X, @3x was a theoretical resolution - that was (and still is on Plus devices) a resolution that is rendered both by design and GPU at that exact size. At which point @3x ((1242 x 2208) portrait orientation) is downscaled to match the actual res of the plus device’s 1080 x 1920 screen real estate. (Think taking a hi-res photo and down along it to suit a smaller frame)

    You couldn’t be more wrong, and for me it’s a point of contention, because I am an iOS developer and love to read these kinds of articles as it affects my future in possibly positive or negative ways, we have an uncertain future and Apple are paving the way...You are a stockholder so maybe you should be more vocal on defending/attacking the articles that are more aimed at you as a stockholder/manipulator/kool aid drinker, and leave the basics (a blank Labrador got it) of how @3x works to those that understand it. And just to be clear whilst you have a misunderstanding of “theoretical res” on the plus devices, actual @3x res was already archived by Apple with the iPhone X last year. Get out of your station and get with the program already. Get out of bed, get out of your pajamas and get a life. Just saying.
    There's a lot of data that shows that @3x images for the 5.5" iPhone, that was introduced for the iPhone 6 Plus, does exist. And I know that I have had many apps that were not optimized for that device/display regardless of what you state.


    To put this another way to make sure there's no confusion, you're saying that if you have an app designed for the 4.7" iPhone with a 1334×750 display, it'll be windowed on the  5.5" iPhone with a 1920×1080 display. That's a 165 pixels on each side and 293 on both the top and bottom. I've never seen that, except for when you could run 3.5" iPhone apps on the iPad due to the different aspect ratios. It's always scaled to the size of the display.
    edited May 2018 mike eggleston
  • Reply 18 of 30
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

    Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
    I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

    For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

    We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

    Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
    Soli, soli, soli...I have read articles here for many years and have found your comments to be sometimes insightful and informative - usually hilarious. I had to register this time to reply to your post.

    You are wrong.

    The Plus devices don’t upscale @2x to @3x at all. Until the iPhone X, @3x was a theoretical resolution - that was (and still is on Plus devices) a resolution that is rendered both by design and GPU at that exact size. At which point @3x ((1242 x 2208) portrait orientation) is downscaled to match the actual res of the plus device’s 1080 x 1920 screen real estate. (Think taking a hi-res photo and down along it to suit a smaller frame)

    You couldn’t be more wrong, and for me it’s a point of contention, because I am an iOS developer and love to read these kinds of articles as it affects my future in possibly positive or negative ways, we have an uncertain future and Apple are paving the way...You are a stockholder so maybe you should be more vocal on defending/attacking the articles that are more aimed at you as a stockholder/manipulator/kool aid drinker, and leave the basics (a blank Labrador got it) of how @3x works to those that understand it. And just to be clear whilst you have a misunderstanding of “theoretical res” on the plus devices, actual @3x res was already archived by Apple with the iPhone X last year. Get out of your station and get with the program already. Get out of bed, get out of your pajamas and get a life. Just saying.
    There's a lot of data that shows that @3x images for the 5.5" iPhone, that was introduced for the iPhone 6 Plus, does exist. And I know that I have had many apps that were not optimized for that device/display regardless of what you state.



      Okay umm..stackoverflow? That’s a bit like quoting Wikipedia. Worse. Okay as a self-respecting iOS dev, I will safety quote this link: https://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/iphone-6-screens-demystified

      Please note that I only needed one link to prove my point. Just because some dumbass Chinese devs/stackoverflow cretins - don’t optimise their apps to support @3x, is the onus on Apple? Are we having the same convo?
    • Reply 19 of 30
      SoliSoli Posts: 8,433member
      Soli said:
      Soli said:
      Rayz2016 said:

      Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

      Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
      I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

      For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

      We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

      Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
      Soli, soli, soli...I have read articles here for many years and have found your comments to be sometimes insightful and informative - usually hilarious. I had to register this time to reply to your post.

      You are wrong.

      The Plus devices don’t upscale @2x to @3x at all. Until the iPhone X, @3x was a theoretical resolution - that was (and still is on Plus devices) a resolution that is rendered both by design and GPU at that exact size. At which point @3x ((1242 x 2208) portrait orientation) is downscaled to match the actual res of the plus device’s 1080 x 1920 screen real estate. (Think taking a hi-res photo and down along it to suit a smaller frame)

      You couldn’t be more wrong, and for me it’s a point of contention, because I am an iOS developer and love to read these kinds of articles as it affects my future in possibly positive or negative ways, we have an uncertain future and Apple are paving the way...You are a stockholder so maybe you should be more vocal on defending/attacking the articles that are more aimed at you as a stockholder/manipulator/kool aid drinker, and leave the basics (a blank Labrador got it) of how @3x works to those that understand it. And just to be clear whilst you have a misunderstanding of “theoretical res” on the plus devices, actual @3x res was already archived by Apple with the iPhone X last year. Get out of your station and get with the program already. Get out of bed, get out of your pajamas and get a life. Just saying.
      There's a lot of data that shows that @3x images for the 5.5" iPhone, that was introduced for the iPhone 6 Plus, does exist. And I know that I have had many apps that were not optimized for that device/display regardless of what you state.



        Okay umm..stackoverflow? That’s a bit like quoting Wikipedia. Worse. Okay as a self-respecting iOS dev, I will safety quote this link: https://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/iphone-6-screens-demystified

        Please note that I only needed one link to prove my point. Just because some dumbass Chinese devs/stackoverflow cretins - don’t optimise their apps to support @3x, is the onus on Apple? Are we having the same convo?
        That link you supplied literally backs up my comment about the larger display, higher resolution, and even says "renders at @3x." And even though I'm not a developer, I'm aware that they rendered at a higher resolution and then downsampled for a smaller physical display, but that's not in question. The question is about running an app for a 4.7"  iPhone on a 5.5" iPhone which scales up the entire app and it looks like shit. I hope you follow Apple's HIG.
        edited May 2018
      • Reply 20 of 30
        Soli said:
        Soli said:
        Soli said:
        Rayz2016 said:

        Citing "little birdies," Gruber confirmed work on the initiative that will allow iOS apps to run on Mac

        Unsurprisingly, he said nothing of the sort.
        I only read the latest article (not his in-depth educated guess to which he linked in the article), but I agree with you. All I read was how this could allow developers to write less code to support both iOS and macOS at the same time, not run an iOS app on a Mac.

        For some maybe that distinction isn't clear, so perhaps imagining an iPad app running on an iPhone would be a better example. They support different aspect rations and resolutions so you end up with something that is less than ideal not to mention UI elements that were designed for the larger display now running on a small display.

        We can look at the early days of the iPad to see iPhone apps running on the iPad. The I/O is virtually identical yet an iPhone app on the iPad was always a piss poor experience. Would an ARM-based Mac need that same kind of support until Intel-based macOS apps can be updated in the Mac App Store? Was that a Band-Aid Apple would want to repeat? Did it help iPad sales? Did it hinder iPad app development?

        Personally, I'm more interested in how a unified code base—not unified or cross platform apps—will help with just getting iOS apps to run on the Plus version of the iPhone, @3x, without being scaled up from the @2x. I feel like it's been long enough.
        Soli, soli, soli...I have read articles here for many years and have found your comments to be sometimes insightful and informative - usually hilarious. I had to register this time to reply to your post.

        You are wrong.

        The Plus devices don’t upscale @2x to @3x at all. Until the iPhone X, @3x was a theoretical resolution - that was (and still is on Plus devices) a resolution that is rendered both by design and GPU at that exact size. At which point @3x ((1242 x 2208) portrait orientation) is downscaled to match the actual res of the plus device’s 1080 x 1920 screen real estate. (Think taking a hi-res photo and down along it to suit a smaller frame)

        You couldn’t be more wrong, and for me it’s a point of contention, because I am an iOS developer and love to read these kinds of articles as it affects my future in possibly positive or negative ways, we have an uncertain future and Apple are paving the way...You are a stockholder so maybe you should be more vocal on defending/attacking the articles that are more aimed at you as a stockholder/manipulator/kool aid drinker, and leave the basics (a blank Labrador got it) of how @3x works to those that understand it. And just to be clear whilst you have a misunderstanding of “theoretical res” on the plus devices, actual @3x res was already archived by Apple with the iPhone X last year. Get out of your station and get with the program already. Get out of bed, get out of your pajamas and get a life. Just saying.
        There's a lot of data that shows that @3x images for the 5.5" iPhone, that was introduced for the iPhone 6 Plus, does exist. And I know that I have had many apps that were not optimized for that device/display regardless of what you state.



          Okay umm..stackoverflow? That’s a bit like quoting Wikipedia. Worse. Okay as a self-respecting iOS dev, I will safety quote this link: https://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/iphone-6-screens-demystified

          Please note that I only needed one link to prove my point. Just because some dumbass Chinese devs/stackoverflow cretins - don’t optimise their apps to support @3x, is the onus on Apple? Are we having the same convo?
          That link you supplied literally backs up my comment about the larger display, higher resolution, and even says "renders at @3x." And even though I'm not a developer, I'm aware that they rendered at a higher resolution and then downsampled for a smaller physical display, but that's not in question. The question is about running an app for a 4.7"  iPhone on a 5.5" iPhone which scales up the entire app and it looks like shit. I hope you follow Apple's HIG.
          Like I said, I think we are running a different conversation here. I am going to just leave this at this: It’s labour day here in Spain and I am going to take a beer or two, but quickly - I don’t fully understand what you are getting at. Maybe you mean when a partially blind, plus user selects the assessability “zoom” option that renders the “4.7”” version of an app to a 5.5” screen? In that case what do you expect? On the other hand (and something you misunderstand about the 4.7” screen) there isn’t a single app on the App Store designed (pixel wise) for the 4.7” screen. The truth is that all 4.7” devices run an upscaled 4” app. The only devices that run upscaled artwork/res are the 4.7” devices. Stop trying to be so clever. You never know when it will make you look stupid.
        Sign In or Register to comment.