It's not just Mac software - desktop software in general seems to be stagnating.<p>As noted, several app categories seem to have "matured" and/or ossified and are dominated by one or two players. For example, Microsoft and Apple dominate the "office" productivity software market on macOS.<p>Moreover, apps like Discord, Teams, VS Code, etc. seem to be cross-platform web apps which are clunky and unsatisfying compared to native apps. (Other web apps don't even have desktop versions and only exist in the browser.)<p>That being said, Adobe's offerings are expensive subscriptions which have opened up a market for Affinity as well as Pixelmator and Acorn.
Some theories:<p>* Lucrative FAANG jobs have hollowed out the indie dev market<p>* Apple's cultural push for $1 apps has made it hard to charge sustainable amounts for indie apps<p>* The rise of iOS has pulled ObjC (and now Swift) devs away from Mac software<p>* Our industry has moved towards vertical integration. Eg before we used to use Campfire for team communication, using indie apps such as Flint as clients because campfire had an api. Nowadays tech companies want to 'own' the whole shebang, eg Slack has no API and publish their own desktop client. But these big companies by nature have no appetite for making a nice native app, it's all electron so they can get x-plat feature parity.
What no one seem to mention is the mentality that software should cost almost nothing. The other day I researched an alternative to MS Word for Mac and found Nisus Writer Pro. Immediately fell in love with it and did not hesitate a second before paying 65 Euros for this beautiful app. My colleague went like „Woah, that‘s expensive.“ Really? We pay so much for so many things, why not value a good product and pay the price. This colleague buys several cups of coffee a day (!) for almost four euros each, and thinks software should cost almost nothing.<p>And this is a mentality that I see very often. When I read software reviews they go like: „xyz is a pretty decent piece of software, but at 50 Euros it is a rather expensive piece.“ WTF.
I wish the Windows software landscape was as interesting as the Mac. Windows gets all the best games, but if you aren’t interested in games, there isn’t a whole lot of anything new or interesting. The web, although newer, is just as dull these days. iOS and Android aren’t doing much better.<p>Maybe it’s a sign that personal computing is now about as interesting as other appliances. Things are mature.<p>The author has posted a follow-up here: <a href="http://morrick.me/archives/9523" rel="nofollow">http://morrick.me/archives/9523</a>
Honestly? It's Chrome (and, by extension, Electron) being relatively good as a "native platform" that killed "native apps" on Mac. (And I guess Windows/Linux too, I don't know.)<p>Ironically Chrome got its start as an Apple WebKit fork, but they invested a lot in it from then.<p>Anyway. People just write it in Electron, or just go for web app directly. It's like Java of yesteryear - "write once, run anywhere, but never good".<p>We can fight it or embrace it, I'm afraid.
This isn’t a hard position, but I’m leaning towards the idea that we may actually have all the desktop software we need, at least in broad strokes. The applications could of course always get better <cough>Microsoft Office<cough>, but I’m not sure there are all that many unfilled needs in desktop software.<p>“The platform is the application”, in a sense. The last piece of software that really truly changed my life was Waze. And that software <i>couldn’t</i> have been desktop software. The next piece was one of Google Translate and/or the many language translation apps in the App Store, including the camera-based ones. Again, that’s software that if it was useful at all would have a very different level of usefulness as desktop software.<p>At some point I suspect AI will actually become useful, and that might - MIGHT - open up new desktop software categories. But we aren’t there yet.
I use Mac. Other than my browser (Firefox), my IDE (Intellij), and Terminal, I don’t really use any other desktop software. Everything else is in the browser. For example, Google docs more than fulfills all my word processing and spreadsheet needs. On occasion I’ll use software that comes on the OS, like Preview. Other than my IDE, I don’t have any other paid software. And I only use IntelliJ because my work pays for it. If I had to purchase it on my own, I’d just use VSCode (despite IntelliJ clearly being superior in my experience).
It’s not the focus of the article—which is clearly intended to narrowly focus on the current state of macOS UI APIs—so I can’t fault it for having no mention of Electron. But it’s hard not to see a huge Electron-shaped hole in the picture painted. At least for my usage, nearly all of my dailyish use apps are either:<p>- built in (Finder, Activity Monitor, Reminders)<p>- macOS native but get little benefit from that other than existing before Electron (iTerm, Tower but even that is an ancient unmaintained version because I’m not sold on the subscription model)<p>- Some Chromium thing, mostly Electron (~90% of my daily usage if not more)<p>And I know this will vary by user but… I suspect that breakdown is similar for anyone using more than built-ins. I <i>love</i> the idea of “Mac-assed Mac apps”[1], but there just… aren’t many and they’re either very specialized (Panic stuff and Pixelmator being prominent examples) or very minimal and of unpredictable quality (the vast majority of the Mac App Store). Though this is a good reminder that I want to buy Paw[2] even though I currently don’t have much use for it.<p>But like… being real, the issue isn’t that native macOS UI toolkits are bad in some way. The issue is that nobody is developing platform-specific desktop UIs at all, give or take first parties and marginalia. If anything, Linux is healthier in this respect than anything else, and that’s because it’s already a hodgepodge of community efforts.<p>1: <a href="https://daringfireball.net/linked/2020/03/20/mac-assed-mac-apps" rel="nofollow">https://daringfireball.net/linked/2020/03/20/mac-assed-mac-a...</a><p>2: <a href="https://paw.cloud/" rel="nofollow">https://paw.cloud/</a>
I worked on Mac and iOS apps until about 10 years ago and then briefly just to keep in touch with changes until about 5 years ago.<p>The main reason I am not interested in indie development is that (1) it is very difficult to sustain in the long run and (2) I don't want to invest a lot of time to learn skills that work only in a closed env<p>Also, I think most necessary apps for the desktop are already there - I cannot think of anything new that would be a must have. I could say the same for mobile apps but many of them are not apps, they are a window into a service once can subscribe to. So in that sense they are new
There’s tons of great stuff coming out:<p>Mimestream is the mail best app I’ve used in decades (gmail only). Id pay the creators $100 or more for a license if he charged.<p>TablePlus is decent.<p>Obsidian for notes.<p>Monodraw for ascii drawings.
I think part of this is Apple constantly deprecating core functionality, combined with the threat environment.<p>People can't just <i>not</i> update their computers anymore. And when you do, old software stops working. So you have to update that, too, often upgrading to a new version and paying for it (or else already being on a subscription plan).<p>This means that a large part of your software budget is eaten up by the overhead of just keeping up to date.<p>Relatedly, SaaS/subscription pricing means software companies are less incentivized to make new software versions enticing. And the hassle of switching subscriptions means transaction costs and lock-in. Consumers aren't likely to switch apps and newer versions of apps won't likely get any switchers because their improvements are incremental at best. So what's the business proposition for a new first-class desktop application?
One aspect that I think is crucial is to the stagnation of Mac software is the lack of good documentation and books. Most of what you find about developing apps with Swift is focused on iOS. If you ask anyone about good resources to learn, they point you to scattered WWDC videos and personal sites of cool developers offering video courses and tutorials.<p>This is very different than what I remember from when Mac OS X was introduced. I remember getting big fat books from Big Nerd Ranch and having wonderful documentation to me as I learned the basics of Objective-C and Cocoa.<p>I've been trying to get back to desktop app development after more than 10 years doing web stuff, and if feels like a totally different place. Heck, there are stub pages at Apple that only list the function signatures and nothing more?! WTF! There are no recent books about developing for macOS.
mimestream (a native gmail client) is a relatively new app and is fantastic. still in beta, but actively developed and solved the one thing I wanted more than anything... to be able to command-tab into my email box.
I have BBEdit, Reeder, OhMyZsh. What else do I need in order to actually do my work?<p>It doesn’t make sense to have a new app for Django development since there’s so much stuff that happens “under the hood”.<p>Is this ecosystem stagnant or mature?<p>You say tomayto I say tomarto
Crusty developers gonna crust?<p>Off the top of my head, these apps are fairly recent and pretty great.<p><pre><code> - OBS (obsproject.com)
- Visual Studio Code
- Tower (git-tower.com)
- Timing (timingapp.com)</code></pre>
Most apps on Mac worth buying are either cross-platform (like Word) or a replacement for something on Windows (Pixelmator Pro, which you could argue is a replacement for several Windows-only paint apps for Windows, including MS Paint itself and Corel Paint Shop Pro). I think that some of the reasons are Mac's smaller market share (so it's harder to recoup your time spent making the app), and the fact that you have to learn a new language (Swift) or at least use a user-unfriendly IDE (XCode) to ship an app (meanwhile you can make an app that's cross-platform between Windows and Linux using GTK or Qt with relative ease).
One thing that prevented me from looking at getting into native macOS development has been that lack of good development resources or training. Every time I have looked at getting into it and start asking around I hear things like "Oh, just learn iOS development and start from there..." or "Just learn Swift and see where it takes you." If there were more learning resources available (and I admit there may be some incredible ones out there that I'm just ignorant of), I think it would still lead some to be interested in the platform.
Why build Mac apps when IOS apps would make more money?<p>Why build native instead of cross platform. The costs are significantly higher and you'll lose out on market share. See figma VS sketch.
I used to install loads of apps - but now I tend to keep things as osx only as possible. One reason is I switch machines so often and my early macs we're customised to the hilt and I've never achieved that level of greatness again. The other is simply I don't trust the 99p and Free apps to do the job as well as the 'old apps' Things like little snitch, disk inventory x theres so many clones that never quite do what you want so I just don't bother.<p>Things like macheist we're great back in the day because you knew you were getting (reasonable) quality but most importantly safe apps. The closest thing now is setapp. I don't subscribe to it but it sure is useful as a first port of call for finding an app that does what I'm looking for thats probably been through some sort of quality control. I've found a few apps through there.<p>Apps I use daily and install instantly on any mac: AppCleaner, AppPolice, little ipsum (random strings of lorum impsum), colorslurp (colour picker), itsycal (calendar in your toolbar) disk inventory x, betterSnapTool (mimics window snapping from mac but lets you drag and drop to custom sizes) Rocket for emojis, and licecap for gif screen recording
><i>If you’ve been a Mac user for more than a few years, let me ask you a question: what is the newest application you have installed that turned out to be so useful and well-made it’s now part of your essential tools? An app that really got you excited and happy to be a Mac user?</i><p>CleanShotX, Viscocity, Tunesify, and Pixelmator.<p>><i>Remember when I was pointing out that iPads were becoming incredibly powerful machines but with an OS that wasn’t capable of taking full advantage of that amazing hardware? Apple has managed to put the Mac in a similar position, in my opinion. The new 14-inch and 16-inch M1 Pro/Max MacBook Pros are brutally performant and energy-efficient machines, but with an operating system that instead of aging well has been rendered immature by too many haphazard plastic surgeries.</i><p>Such as? Because all my pro apps still work: Photoshop and Creative Suite (and Affinity versions of the same), Final Cut Pro, Resolve, and Premiere, Logic, Pro Tools, Live, Cubase, and co, and so on.<p>In fact, thanks to M1, their recent versions work better and faster than ever.
I think it’s unclear what to actually use (language/workflow) for a macos/desktop specific app, when you open xcode. I usually give up after a minute of clicking around and go back to the tools, whose name we don’t speak of here.<p>I’d recommend iina over vlc for everyday use. Keep vlc though for all the wierd stuff.<p>serial 2 for console/hw needs<p>iterm2<p>rectangle<p>deliveries from junecloud<p>calculator/textedit<p>little snitch<p>karabiner elements<p>homebrew<p>tables plus<p>mongodb compass beta (db client)<p>negative (pdf dark mode)<p>tailscale<p>medis (redis gui)<p>lanscan<p>google earth pro<p>davinci resolve studio<p>fcp/logic/motion/compressor<p>xcode<p>contrast.app (picker/a11y)<p>betterDummy (screen res)<p>all the beta/dev/browser versions<p>midiview
I think most software has stagnated because we have hit a wall in terms of user interface until AR/VR/Brain interface improves.<p>I have a few assorted goalposts:<p>* Where are the AR glasses? Google dropped the ball.<p>* I need to be able wave my hand to send things to other people's eyes.<p>* Most games still can't play at 60 fps, which is 2006-era tech.<p>* VR headsets are still poor quality.<p>* Cloud gaming still can't achieve < 1ms input delay. What's up with that? How am I going to post a multi-speedrun where a program randomly switches between game tabs?<p>* Interfaces in general are slow. There needs to be as little delay as possible between my thoughts/actions and the computer's response.<p>* Why can't an iPad simulate the sensation of texture? Tracing lines in sand with my finger on my phone was a cool webgl tech demo 10 years ago. Now I want to feel the sand.<p>* Self-driving cars still don't work.
I think modern human beings tend to be like "give me something I haven't seen before!" or "where is innovation!?". We take very fast tech advancements for granted, but I think things can't simply just go up and up forever, sooner or later it'll plateau.
The sad reality is we've solved many of computation's problems, and don't have much of a utopia around as perhaps expected in solving them.<p>Macs in the 2000's had productivity apps that were needed, fun to discover & to try out:<p>* Growl for notifications<p>* AppFresh for automatic downloads<p>* Quicksilver for file/app search<p>All of which has been solved by the OS.<p>Web 2.0 solved connecting with friends and strangers around the world, as well as many other problems, by FAANG+.<p>Web 3.0/VR will be 2.0 on steroids, which too eventually will get boring.<p>As big of a nerd I am, computation I'm finding can only go so far in satisfaction, thus eventually "stagnate."
I wonder if Apple's dev tools/swift teams can overcome whatever dysfunction is going on there (see the whole Chris Lattner Swift brouhaha) and release something coherent i.e. a mature swift UI w/ cross compiling support for windows and web js apps...would that give a shot in the arm to getting mac-first native apps that can spread elsewhere? It might take the wind out of some of electron's sails
I love native apps as a user, but as a developer why invest time and energy into a shifting landscape? Better to put effort into building a SaaS. I think this quote from the article sums it up well:<p>> Right now, it feels a little bit like the three main MacOS app frameworks are floating in unanchored space: AppKit is not the future, Catalyst is not ready to replace it, and using SwiftUI remains a long way off for big, complicated apps.
> Right now, it feels a little bit like the three main MacOS app frameworks are floating in unanchored space: AppKit is not the future, Catalyst is not ready to replace it, and using SwiftUI remains a long way off for big, complicated apps.<p>This is why I cannot take MAUI's decision to use Catalyist on the Mac as anything other than taking shortcuts to port Xamarin.iOS to the Mac, not even VS for Mac rewrite is using it.
At the end of the day Mac users are so few in number and cost so much to retain and acquire that it's not worth the dev cycles to make Mac native software. MacOS is slightly better than Windows to target as a developer, and fine to use if you disable all the nag/scare messages that $App wants to be able to save your preferences - but it's just cheaper and easier to make a web app today.
I wished the android intent system was adopted by mac (or windows). the share with/open with landscape and workflow is very patchy.<p>case in point: I have blender and five 3d model viewers installed but still often get zilch options when I try to open a model from the web.<p>image you could click on an image or object and being offered a myriad of actions already installed or available on the app store.
After Apple’s years’ of advocating iPads being the next computer, I bought Magic Keyboard and other accessories, but I can confidently tell you it is not. It’s just not the one that belongs to me. Seeing the state of Mac software ecosystem being stagnated is just sad.
I've been staying with PC for 2 decades now because of foobar2000. I hope Mac gets something similar, but it's becoming less and less likely to happen as time goes on.
I think you can't leave out how much html/css/js has progressed since Netscape Navigator in late 90'ies.<p>Modern browsers and web backends makes it so much faster to implement functionality that takes forever to implement in a native Desktop app. People who are "native app" envangelists tend to completely ignore this major difference.<p>e.g. "Auto Layout" in Swift is just a bare bones reimplementation of what we have in modern css with flexbox and grid.<p>also: it is much easier to collaborate with other people when you can just send them a link instead of "Word doc version 2, final, really final".