here’s-how-to-run-any-ios-app-you-own-on-apple’s-new-m1-macs

Here’s how to run any iOS app you own on Apple’s new M1 Macs

Earlier today, MacRumors reported that it is possible to run any iOS app you have purchased on an M1-based Mac, provided you can get access to the right file. Sure enough, if you’ve purchased or downloaded an app for your iPhone or iPad, it is possible to get it running on an M1-based Mac — I am currently looking at the iOS versions of Dark Sky, Spotify, Slack, Netflix, and Gmail on this MacBook Air.

Running some of these apps, it’s fairly clear in some cases why these developers haven’t immediately made them available for the Mac in the Mac App Store. Netflix, for example, is bounded inside a window and can’t be resized or go full screen (but it works, and you can even download videos for offline viewing). Instagram is relatively small on the screen, but it also runs fine, you can post, and it seems to hook into the right photo library and camera permissions. Many of these apps require Apple’s “Touch Alternatives” system to work.

Spotify’s iPad app, running on an M1 MacBook Air. It is resizable and seems to work just fine.

To get these apps running, you just need to get the app files, which are simply packages with the .IPA file extension. And these files need to be associated with your Apple ID, so you can’t just share them around to other people.

A long time ago, IPA files were easy to find in an unencrypted iTunes backup, but that’s no longer the case. Instead, you can use a long-standing Mac app called iMazing to directly download legitimately purchased IPA files to your Mac. Simply double click them and they install into your applications folder like any other app so long as your Mac and iPhone are on the same Apple ID.

We’re far for the first to discover this. MacRumors reported it and the first place I can find confirmation is this post by redditor probablyamy, who also explained the step by step process.

1. Plug-in device to Mac with iMazing running

2. Select “Apps” for the iPhone plugged in to your Mac

3. Select “Manage Apps” in the tabs at the bottom

4. Select “Library” in the manage apps screen

5. Download the apps you want

6. Right click on the downloaded app in the list -> Export ipa

7. Double-click the .ipa file on an M1 Mac to run install it.

Having run into some bugs myself with earlier versions of iOS apps ahead of the review, I will tell you that there are quite likely to be even more bugs with this method — both inside some of these apps and possibly even with your macOS system. This is more something to play around with than it is something you should consider for any important apps that you use.

Apple’s policy is that the only approved way to install iOS apps is to get them from the Mac App Store and the only way for developers to distribute iOS apps to Mac users is via that same store. Which means this method may or may not continue to work down the line.

what-twitter-fleets-signals-about-the-future-of-the-company

What Twitter Fleets signals about the future of the company

I.

In March 2017, I drove down to the Instagram offices in Menlo Park to meet with founder Kevin Systrom. The subject of the meeting had not been disclosed to me in advance, and when we sat down in a conference room, Systrom had a surprise for me: his team had cloned Snapchat’s popular stories feature and planned to more or less import the design wholesale into Instagram.

It was a brazen move, particularly by the standards of American business, but it was undeniably effective: Instagram usage surged dramatically, and Snapchat plateaued. Soon stories started popping up everywhere: Tinder, Google Photos, LinkedIn, and Medium, to name a few. (A recurring joke holds that Excel will someday add stories; at this point, I wouldn’t bet against it.)

One place stories never showed up was an app where their inclusion felt obvious, at least to me: Twitter. CEO Jack Dorsey first envisioned the service as a way to share status messages, like the ones once found on AOL Instant Messenger, and statuses were the original ephemeral stories. Then in March, ephemeral tweets finally appeared on Twitter. The company called them Fleets, and after testing the feature in Brazil and India, it rolled them out globally yesterday.

Here’s Kurt Wagner in Bloomberg:

Company executives said research has shown that many users are too intimidated to post or engage with others on the service, which has led to an effort to find new ways to spark interaction.

“Tweeting, retweeting, engaging in conversation can honestly be incredibly terrifying,” said Nikkia Reveillac, Twitter’s head of research. “We do not know how others will react to us, we do not know if anyone will reply, and we do not know if anybody will even care.”

This is a version of what Systrom told me when introducing Instagram Stories. The central Instagram feed had become a place where users expected to find only the most highly polished, manicured photos of a person’s life; stories offered them a lower-pressure way to post. Fleets are designed to work the same way, and I suspect they will.

Twitter enters the ephemeral posting game with some real advantages on its side. One, the format is familiar — if you’ve posted an Instagram story, you already know how to post a fleet. Two, the real-time nature of Twitter lends itself to documenting photos and videos in the moment — something fleets excel at. (Twitter never really cracked photo or video sharing; I suspect Fleets will help it make inroads there.)

And three, tweets have always been best thought of as a mostly ephemeral format anyway. The old joke about Twitter is that it was where you would go to discuss what you had for breakfast. Now fleets are here, and there’s never been a better place to post your bowl of Cheerios.

Of course, Twitter has some disadvantages to contend with, too. The reason the format is familiar is because it’s already everywhere; fleets have a lot of competition, and many of those competitors already have rich and compelling feature sets. (Compared to what you can do with video on Instagram, TikTok, or Snapchat, fleets are barely at the starting line.) Secondly, Twitter’s historically glacial pace of iteration means it could take Fleets a long time to catch up — and competitors will be inventing new creative tools all the while.

And third, it’s worth asking whether Twitter could have gotten a lot of the benefits of a story-like feature simply by giving users the option to make tweets ephemeral. Fleets look like a smart, if belated, way to fight the last war. Wasn’t the real leapfrog move here to take the Twitter graph and build the first “story-first” social app?

II.

One of the things Fleets copied from Instagram is the idea of one-tap story reactions: a heart, a fire emoji, a crying emoji, and so on. It’s interesting to think about this move in the context of Twitter’s long-stated desire to spur more “healthy conversations” on the platform.

That initiative, which dates back more than two years now, is a broad and somewhat amorphous effort to solve Twitter’s longstanding issues with harassment and abuse on the platform. One way you can do that is by structuring conversations at the product level — and encouraging users to reply to one another with heart and other sympathetic emoji can be an effective way of doing so.

Stories can also promote healthier conversations by making replies private. Much abuse goes down in the DMs, true, but there can be less incentive to harass someone if your reply is not visible right underneath the original post, racking up likes and retweets as more people see it.

Another way to structure conversations is to set boundaries around who can participate. That’s why I was struck by how Twitter is approaching the rollout of Clubhouse-style new audio chat rooms inside the app, called “Spaces,” which are due to begin testing later this year. The company is basically hand-picking the users it will allow to participate as it tests audio chat. Here’s Nick Statt at The Verge:

The company plans to start testing the feature this year, but notably, Twitter will be giving first access to some of the people who are most affected by abuse and harassment on the platform: women and people from marginalized backgrounds, the company says.

In one of these conversation spaces, you’ll be able to see who is a part of the room and who is talking at any given time. The person who makes the space will have moderation controls and can determine who can actually participate, too. Twitter says it will experiment with how these spaces are discovered on the platform, including ways to invite participants via direct messages or right from a public tweet.

Clubhouse has struggled with moderation issues since it launched earlier this year. Twitter’s move to start with women and other underrepresented users represents an intriguing effort to learn from Clubhouse’s mistake. And at least before it opens the floodgates to all users, that seems like a way to bring more good conversation onto the platform.

During a call with reporters yesterday, I asked Kayvon Beykpour, Twitter’s head of product, what he saw in audio. Notably, he led with its ability to generate empathy in conversations. Here’s what he told me:

“Our mechanics incentivize very short-form, high-brevity conversation, which is amazing and powerful and has led to all the impact that Twitter has had in the world. But it’s a very specific type of discourse, right? It’s very difficult to have long, deep, thoughtful conversations.

Audio is interesting for us because the format lends itself to a different kind of behavior. When you can hear someone’s voice, you can empathize with them in a way that is just more difficult to do when a you’re in an asynchronous environment. … We think audio is powerful, because that empathy is is real and raw in a way that you can’t achieve over text in the same way.”

Often when we are talking about how to build better social platforms, we discuss them in terms of what or who they should ban. What I like about Twitter’s moves this week is that they show another way platforms can move forward: by designing spaces for conversation with intention, announcing those intentions at launch, and then encouraging us all to hold them accountable to it as they go. The success of fleets or audio spaces is far from guaranteed. But in some important ways, they strike me as a true step forward.

This column was co-published with Platformer, a daily newsletter about Big Tech and democracy.

apple-m1-chip:-specs,-performance,-everything-we-know

Apple M1 Chip: Specs, Performance, Everything We Know



(Image credit: Apple)

Apple’s new in-house M1 chip is officially on the market. The first reviews and benchmarks are starting to pop up, so we’re gathering everything we know about it into one handy place, which we’ll update as we learn more.


 

Apple M1 Cheat Sheet: Key details at a glance 

Release Date: Ships Week of 11/16
Found in: MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini
Architecture: Arm-based
CPU Cores: 8-core CPU
Nm Process: 5nm
Graphics: Integrated 8-core GPU with 2.6 teraflops of throughput
Memory: 8GB or 16GB of LPDDR4X-4266 MHz SDRAM

 Apple M1 Release Date 

The first computers with Apple’s M1 chip are

already up for purchase

. To try it, you’re going to have to choose between one of the three new products that feature the chip: the new

MacBook Air

, the

13-inch MacBook Pro

or the

Mac Mini

. Each comes with two configurations using the M1. The MacBook Pro also still has two Intel configurations on offer, and the Mac Mini has one Intel processor offering.

Apple started shipping out M1 device purchases this week. 

Apple M1 Price 

The M1 is a mobile chip, so you have to get it built into one of Apple’s machines.

The Mac Mini starts at $699 with 256GB of storage, making it the cheapest way to get an M1 processor. The price range stretches all the way to $2,099, which will net you the 13-inch MacBook Pro with 2TB of storage. 

Pricing is largely down to the specifics of your purchase. But so far, it doesn’t seem like M1 Macs will be significantly more expensive than Intel-based Intel counterparts. The M1 MacBook Air configuration that is most similar to the Intel MacBook Air we reviewed earlier this year is  $1,249, for instance, which is $50 cheaper than last year’s version. The $999 starting price remains unchanged.  

Apple M1 Specs 

Here’s the M1’s bread-and-butter. What does Apple’s new Arm-based chip have that Intel’s x86 architecture doesn’t? Well, it uses a

5nm process

, for one. By comparison, even

Intel’s 7nm process

isn’t expected to start hitting its products until at least 2022. Apple’s CPU has 8 cores, which you would typically need to step up to Intel’s H-series product stack to get on mobile chips.

Four of the M1’s cores are dedicated to high-power performance, while the other 4 are for low-power efficiency. That evens out to a 10W thermal envelope overall, with the low power cores supposedly taking up a tenth of the power needed for the high-power cores. The chip also has a total of 16 billion transistors.

The M1 is also a system on a chip (SOC) with integrated graphics and onboard memory. The included GPU has 8 cores as well, with 128 total compute units and 2.6 teraflops of throughput (there is one exception here: the entry level MacBook Air uses a version of the M1 with a 7-core GPU). The “unified memory” replaces the need for separate RAM, meaning that the chip comes with either 8GB or 16GB of LPDDR4X-4266 MHz SDRAM, depending on your device.

The M1 also has a separate 16-core neural engine for machine learning tasks. 

(Image credit: Apple)

Apple M1 Native Performance 

The core drawback to the M1 chip right now is that, because it uses a different architecture and instruction set from Intel or AMD parts, it won’t be able to run x86 apps without emulating them. Developers are already on the case, with Microsoft saying it’s working on a version of Microsoft Office that will run natively on M1 machines and Adobe saying that it’s working on an M1-native creative suite. But early adopters might have to wait a bit to get the most performance they can out of their new chips.

When the M1 does get to run natively, though, it seems to pack some serious power.

Engadget

reports that the M1 MacBook Air had Geekbench 5 results of 1,619/6,292. That’s well above their results for the

2020 i7 MacBook Air

, which were 1,130/3,053. Meanwhile, the Tiger Lake

Dell XPS 13 9310

scored in 1,496/5,254 on our own Geekbench 5.0 benchmarks, while the

ThinkPad X1 Carbon Extreme Gen 3

with an Intel Core i7-10850H chip scored 1,221/6,116.

The M1’s single-core score also beats the 27-inch 2020 Core i9 iMac’s single-core score, which only hit 1,246. It loses out to the iMac’s 9,046 multi-core score, but that officially gives the M1 higher single-core test results out of any Intel Macs, even desktops.

Outlets like The Verge also tested the M1, but under different conditions. Using a MacBook Pro and testing with Geekbench 5.3, The Verge found its review unit scored 1,730/7,510 points. 

We’re curious to see how the M1 stacks against a potential 8-core Tiger Lake chip down the line, as well as AMD’s new Ryzen 5000 processors, which are also looking to take Intel’s CPU crown. For now, though, the M1 is looking to be the fastest mobile chip you can buy.

Apple M1 Emulated Performance 

Finally, we reach the biggest potential drawback for the M1: Since the Apple M1 uses a completely new architecture (at least new for Macs), it can’t natively run apps designed for x86 chips. Instead, it has to emulate them. Apple’s built a tool to let users easily do this, called Rosetta 2, but running apps through Rosetta 2 means they’re going to take a performance hit.

Official reviews are reporting on emulation more anecdotally rather than with official numbers, but user

Geekbench results

show that, even when emulating apps, the M1 chip is still faster than Intel counterparts. On November 14th, a user posted test results for an M1-equipped MacBook Air running the x86 version of Geekbench. The machine earned a single-core score of 1,313 and a multi-core score of 5,888. That’s about 79% as powerful as the native scores for the same machine, which were 1,687 on single-core and 7,433 on multi-core. Still, even the emulated scores are higher than any other Intel Mac on single-core, including the 2020 27-inch iMac with a Core i9 processor. As for the multi-core score, it’s still much higher than the 3,067 score of the Core i7 2020 MacBook Air. 

Keep in mind that performance varies from program to program, however. When The Verge tested the x86 version of Adobe Creative Cloud on its MacBook Pro review unit, the publication came across a bug that consistently halved its export bitrate. The publication said that export times stayed flat even when running multiple 4K exports in a row, suggesting strong performance, but it’s a good reminder that emulation still has drawbacks even if benchmark results look strong.

Again, this is a place where we’re looking forward to seeing how the M1 fares against the newest Intel and AMD chips. Because the M1 isn’t going to be running at its best here, other chipmakers might be able to make up the current performance gap more easily in upcoming mobile chip releases.

(Image credit: Annapurna Interactive)

Apple M1 Graphics Performance 

With Apple M1-equipped machines already starting to hit the public, preliminary benchmark results are starting to show up on the GFXBench browser. And while the 8-core, 128 CU, 2.6-teraflop chip’s obviously not going to compete with recent behemoths like the RTX 3000 series or even with older yet higher-end discrete GPUs like the GTX 1080, it does beat old standards like the Radeon RX 560 and the GTX 1050 Ti.

For instance, on high-level GFXBench tests like 1440p Manhattan 3.1.1, the Apple M1 hit 130.9 frames per second, while the 1050 Ti only hit 127.4 fps and the Radeon RX 560 was capped out at 101.4 fps. Meanwhile, on the more intensive Aztec Ruins High Tier test, the M1 hit 77.4 fps while the GTX 1050 Ti maxed out at 61.4 fps. The Radeon RX 560 did perform best in this test, with a score of 82.5 fps, but generally has lower frame rates across most tests. 

Meanwhile, Ars Technica found that the M1 scored 11,476 points in 3DMark’s Slingshot Extreme Unlimited GPU test, as compared to the iPad Pro 2020’s score of 9,978 and the iPhone 12 Pro’s score of 6,226.

While it’s tricky to try to judge overall chip performance off of a few online and mobile benchmarks, these tests are the best official benchmark results we have right now. Still, reviews are making strong anecdotal claims as well. Engadget said that The Pathless runs at a solid 60 fps on its review MacBook Air, as does Fortnite at 1,400 x 900. 

 Apple M1 Battery Life 

Despite packing more processing power overall, the M1 chip comes with 4 low-power cores that help it conserve battery life. Apple’s saying that this gives M1-equipped machines “the best battery life ever on a Mac,” which it tested by wirelessly browsing the web with brightness set to “8 clicks from the bottom” and by playing FHD videos under the same brightness settings. These tests are far from comprehensive, but reviews generally tend to place M1 Macs either around or above current Intel counterparts.

According to Engadget’s battery benchmarks, which “involved looping an HD video,” the M1 MacBook Air can stay powered on for up to 16 hours and 20 minutes, which is about 5 hours more than the publication’s numbers for the latest Intel MacBook Air. That’s also about 7 hours more than we got on our own battery benchmark for the the latest Intel MacBook Air.

The Verge found that the M1 MacBook Pro’s numbers are a little less impressive, which is to be expected with more power. The publication claimed to “easily get 10 hours on a charge” and said it had to resort to running 4K YouTube videos on Chrome in the background to drop that down to 8 hours.

The Verge is less optimistic on MacBook Air, though, saying it’s getting “between 8 and 10 hours of real, sustained work.” 

macOS Big Sur, iPhone and iPad Apps 

One of the coolest new features of the M1 chip is that, because it uses the same processor architecture as the iPhone and iPad, it can now run apps designed for those devices natively. However, reviewers are skeptical of this feature’s current implementation.

First, you’ll have to download these programs through the Mac app store using a filter, since developers still aren’t allowed to directly distribute iOS apps even on more traditional systems. Second, you’ll find that many of your favorites won’t be available, like Gmail, Slack and Instagram. That’s because developers are allowed to opt out of making their apps available on Mac, which plenty seem to be opting for. Third, apps that require touch input direct you to a series of unintuitive “touch alternatives,” like pressing space to tap in the center of a window or using the arrow keys to swipe.

The Verge called using iOS apps on Mac a “messy, weird experience,” in part because the apps that are available are “from developers that haven’t been updated to be aware of newer devices.” While Overcast, a podcast app, worked great for The Verge, HBO Max was stuck to a small window that couldn’t be resized and couldn’t play fullscreen videos.

Playing iOS games also proved to be a chore for some reviewers, as

TechCrunch

noted. The publication tried the iOS version of Among Us on an M1 MacBook Air and found that, while it ran smoothly, using the trackpad to emulate a touchscreen was a chore. There’s also an option to operate a virtual touchscreen with your mouse, but as the reviewer also ran across a fixed window size with no full screen functionality, it’s clear that gaming on M1 still has a way to go.

The elephant in the room here across all experiences seems to be the lack of a touchscreen. We were hoping Apple would announce touchscreen Macs during its ‘One More Thing’ event earlier this month. But with no word on those yet, it’s hard for iOS apps on M1 to feel like more than an afterthought. There’s also the lack of support from big developers, who are probably waiting for these kinks, like no touchscreen support, to work themselves out.