Veteran Apple expert and commentator Jason Snell asked of me the question that’s the title of this post. This was after I (playfully) responded to his thoughts about Apple working on a “new, consistent design” with an XKCD klaxon jibe.

The actual answer to the question, in true Betteridge’s Law fashion, is no. But really: it’s complicated. 

In the full Mastodon thread, Snell suggested we should praise optimism over negativity, and called the latter “no way to live”. Similar sentiments about Apple have recently been expressed by Federico Viticci and David Smith. And, despite my often cynical and curmudgeonly demeanour, I think there’s value in that way of thinking. Being relentlessly negative is no fun.

But.

I’m not keen on recent trends that suggest where Apple might head, hiding or removing yet more UI, including iPhone app tabs and iPad app sidebars. More importantly, every single major Apple redesign – even more so than ‘standard’ annual OS updates – results in a slew of vestibular accessibility issues that slip through the net.

I’m not sure why this is the case. And, to be fair, Apple’s iOS team has been very responsive ever since the iOS 7 days. Multiple requests that I’ve made have been rolled into iOS, which remains far ahead of Apple’s other operating systems in terms of usability for people who have vestibular conditions. (Stern glare @ tvOS team…)

Even so, more proactive support would be welcome. And so, returning to the question posed at the start, I’m not afraid of a major iOS redesign per se, but I am concerned that it will render my devices unusable for weeks or even months until fixes are made. If that’s primarily for a coat of fresh paint, that will be particularly dispiriting.

Writer Matt Gemmell decided eight years ago to go all-in on iPad. Now, he’s switched back to the Mac. This should set alarm bells ringing on Apple’s iPad team, but I imagine Apple as a whole won’t really be fussed. After all, Matt simply swapped one Apple product for another. And he’s keeping the iPad. If anything, this is a victory for Apple and precisely what it wants people to do.

In his post, Matt notes part of the problem with the iPad is that it’s never been strongly defined. When Steve Jobs introduced the iPad, it was positioned somewhere between a phone and a laptop. Since then, users have argued for it to take over the capabilities of both devices – but especially the latter. However, while the iPad has the power of Apple’s ‘proper’ computers, it lacks the flexibility and, in some cases, utility. All of which is by design.

What some people tend to forget is that Apple is very opinionated on wanting people to buy (at least one) Mac alongside any Apple mobile devices. It’s my ongoing belief that arbitrary barriers have therefore been – at best – left in place for that purpose. Friction exists in part not because Apple cannot find a solution that works on a tablet, but because Apple wants more of your money, and it gets that through hardware sales.

Right now, any current-gen iPhone is more than powerful enough to run the vast majority of software the average person would want to use. And more. Mine happily runs Korg Gadget projects with an absurd number of tracks. But Apple absolutely does not want your iPhone to become the one device to rule them all. It hates the idea of you getting home and plugging your iPhone into a dock, and using it with a keyboard, display and pointing device. Because then you’d only buy one thousand-buck device, rather than two – or several. The iPad isn’t quite in the same space. After all, Apple is quite happy about selling iPad keyboards that cost as much as entry-level iPads. But it would still prefer for you to own an iPad and a Mac. And an iPhone. And maybe a second Mac. And so on.

I’ve struggled with the same issues as Matt. I for a time really wanted an iPad to become more. I love using the device. But I stuck with an iMac for the day job, primarily due to iPad frictions relating to external display support. Even when Stage Manager arrived, it was far, far too slow and clunky to replace my Mac set-up. My iPad subsequently largely turned into a combination of comics reader and sofa-based music-creation sketchpad, with the odd smattering of video and games. One holiday, I took only the iPad and found myself frustrated by how much longer key tasks took when I was trying to work at speed, in order to enjoy more of my spare time.

From a personal standpoint, things have changed a little since last September, in terms of my iPad usage. Although that’s not really been down to the iPad itself. There’s something very off for me about the iPhone 16 Pro. I’m reasonably certain I cannot use it for any extended length of time without getting dizzy. Despite my issues with vestibular triggers, I’ve never had this with any other Apple display when a device has Reduce Motion active. Perhaps something has changed with the display and PWM. I don’t know. But this does mean my iPad is now doing more work again, in being the device I read on at breakfast or noodle around on of an evening. Notably, though, the iPad is still not being used more for work. And I’m not sure that will ever change.

Apple never wanted emulators on the App Store. I imagine it felt strong-armed into allowing them, due to EU regulators getting antsy, or as a means to attempt to derail third-party app AltStore, which an awful lot of people primarily cared about due to Nintendo emulator Delta. Even with that, Apple first authorised a terrible rip-off over Delta, and everything since has been at best a crapshoot.

PPSSPP Gold is currently in kafkaesque hell, with absurdist responses from app review. Mini vMac was blocked from the App Store, because Apple took umbrage at the idea of an emulator that used its IP. But then Apple went a step further and wouldn’t notarise it for third-party stores, which is outrageous. 

These aren’t the only issues emulator authors have faced. Last I checked, MAME4iOS was in limbo. Several other emulator authors have given up. Meanwhile, Apple merrily approves emulators that barely work and are exploitative crap. A cynic might wonder whether this is intent, to showcase the worst of emulation and put people off. Although given app review’s history, it’s perhaps more realistic to instead go for the old saying that you should never put down to malice what could be explained by incompetence.

In 2013, I wrote a piece for The Guardian about iOS 7 causing motion sickness. This followed under-the-radar pieces about how animations could cause nausea and other symptoms in users. Fortunately, The Guardian piece got a lot of eyeballs on it, including – I was informed at the time – sufficiently senior people at Apple.

I remain deeply grateful to the iOS team in particular for subsequently taking vestibular accessibility seriously. The majority of issues I’ve flagged over the years have been acted upon. I vividly remember getting a wonderful surprise on the sole WWDC I was flown out to, on attending a developer session on accessibility and seeing someone on stage proudly noting that slide transitions in menus had been added to Reduce Motion. That was one of my last major issues on the platform, which I’d been bugging the iOS team about fixing. And, yes, reader, I may have welled up a bit.

But what I find disappointing is that, all these years after that Guardian piece broke, vestibular accessibility remains reactive rather than proactive. Nothing illustrates that better than Apple breaking Reduce Motion in Safari of all apps. When Reduce Motion is on, the zooms in the tab view should be replaced by crossfades. They were for a long time. But that went away in iOS 18. I dutifully mentioned this to Apple. It looks like this might be fixed in iOS 18.2. But the problem should never have come back in the first place – and it wouldn’t have if there was even the most rudimentary of testing by someone with Reduce Motion active.

Again, Apple’s iOS team has been the best of them, so I don’t want to slam its efforts. Other teams at Apple have been less responsive. And outside of Apple, my requests to help people with vestibular disorders have mostly been met with responses ranging from indifference to outright hostility. Fortunately, there are a few who do things right. I sent feedback to one major brand this year and received a call the very next day, asking how it could put things right. A month or so later, the app just worked. The animations had gone. But that’s rare. And it’s even rarer that this stuff is baked in from day one. It really shouldn’t be.

I recently wrote about iDOS for iPhone. In June, iDOS was rejected for not emulating a “retro game console”. This despite multiple emulators being approved for the App Store that don’t emulate retro game consoles. However, having initially rejected it, Apple subsequently approved UTM SE, essentially a PC emulator. Logically, then, you’d think Apple would change its mind regarding iDOS. Well, no. On 16 July, the app’s creator said his appeal had been rejected.

It’s surely now clear Apple isn’t serious about allowing emulators on the App Store. But worse: it’s not serious about level playing fields for apps either. Instead, it’s inviting emulator developers to coin-flip approvals, and perhaps (on the basis of the course of events we’ve so far witnessed) changing its mind when not doing so could cause regulatory problems, or when an app could threaten the App Store in some way by causing more people to look elsewhere. UTM, notably, was first rejected for an external app store, Apple sticking up a middle digit to EU regulation. And then when someone at Apple realised that was a very bad idea and UTM was finally approved, it was approved for the App Store as well, which dents any advantage the third-party store has.

However, that UTM is now allowed but iDOS is not is indefensible. They’re both PC emulators. Apple has been inconsistent in the past with App Store rules and approvals, but this pairing is especially stark and egregious. At this point, I wouldn’t spend a single second developing an emulator for iOS. Which is probably how Apple wants it anyway. If I were the iDOS developer, I’d lob the app at AltStore and see what happens. Or, you know, just give up, like so many other ex-iOS devs I hear from these days have already done.

What gets me is this is all so stupid and unnecessary. There’s clearly reluctance from somewhere senior in Apple about emulators. But then the company sort of changed its mind, yet provided no rules. It instead went for the developer-hostile “we’ll know it when we see it”. Only ‘it’ doesn’t mean anything specific. If it did, we wouldn’t currently have ZX81, C64 and MSX emulators on the App Store, given that they emulate hardware platforms that are not retro gaming consoles.

Another thing that’s also come under harsh criticism (and affects UTM’s performance) is Apple blocking support for JIT. This is essential for strong performance when emulating more modern systems and further hamstrings iPhone and iPad in this space. For once, I’m actually OK with this decision. And that’s because Apple has with this decision by accident ended up in a reasonably moral space regarding emulation, making it impossible to emulate modern systems that remain commercially viable. I’m very aware emulation as a whole is a grey area, but there’s a world of difference between firing up Drelbs on my iPhone and loading up a phone with Nintendo Switch titles.

So, frustrating as it might be to some people, that outcome (if not, perhaps, the mechanism) is defensible. But so much else surrounding Apple’s current approach to emulators is, at best, deeply cynical or horribly incompetent. Neither of those things is a great look.