It looks like there are a few people interested in a macOS version of Fig, especially considering that everybody’s stuck at home.
2 Likes
Its not something being worked on. But doesn’t mean it won’t come in future either.
Oh… 
I hope that it’ll come to fruition soon.
Since you already have a great iPad App maybe Catalyst can help?
Did the developers misinterpret something?
Apple has made it even easier to port iOS/iPadOS apps to macOS, mostly because of the Mac ARM transition.
There was also more that was mentioned back in June, but all of this stuff (combined with Catalyst) makes the development of a macOS version of Fig seem like a piece of cake (including recompiling the app for both Intel-based Macs and ARM-based Macs).
One app, two executables. 
On a related note, there’s also an ARM developer kit running macOS.
1 Like
This only makes it easier / trivial for Apple silicon.
For Intel CPU’s it remains as hard as it was before (Catalyst).
1 Like
Universal 2 doesn’t help with that?
Also, I forgot to link this article.
According to Apple, since the iOS apps were built on the same Apple silicon as the upcoming Mac hardware, they will be able to run natively on Mac OS without any modification. Apple showed this off in a demo, where they were able to run iOS apps like Monument Valley, Fender Play and Calm, right on Mac OS, albeit in a smaller screen.
Apple also said that, right from Day One, Mac users with compatible hardware will be able to download these iOS apps right from the Mac App Store. Most apps will be able to work unmodified. In the end, Apple hopes that with this streamlining of software and hardware, that it’ll be that much easier for developers to build apps and software that will work across Apple’s entire line of devices.
Regardless, I still think that Catalyst would make it pretty easy to port Fig to Intel-based Macs.
1 Like
Universal binaries just make it easier to distribute the executables for both platforms in one package.
They don’t make it easier to convert an App that’s written for iOS to the Intel version of macOS. Catalyst does help with that, but that involves more than just selecting a checkbox…
1 Like
Do you think it would be worth porting Fig to the Mac App Store using Catalyst?
Would I use Fig instead of the browser on macOS?
I’m not sure…
Would you use Fig instead of the browser on iOS?
People use Fig because it provides a native Discourse experience in an app, not a browser. Some people also use it because it looks like an app Apple would’ve created.
People want that same experience on macOS, right from the Mac App Store.
1 Like
I do think it’s safe to say that the common user would be better served not having to learn two different UI’s. Obviously people expect differences on phone and computer, but similarity makes it a lot easier to get people on board with using something.
1 Like
Uniformity between devices (in terms of the user interface) is one benefit of Catalyst, so I think the user interfaces would be able to remain similar.
1 Like
Yes. That was my point.
1 Like
Oh, okay. 
I know I asked @rob this, but in general, do you think it would be worth porting Fig to the Mac App Store using Catalyst?
1 Like
It’s worth taking a look at the link below in order to get an internal understanding of Mac Catalyst.
https://developer.apple.com/tutorials/mac-catalyst
As for Fig running on ARM Macs without any modifications, things are looking interesting in regards to how it’ll work. Take a look at the video that you can find by clicking on the link below.
I also recommend watching these videos when you have the time.
1 Like
