One take on Apple’s acquisition of Workflow
It’s the future of programming
In case you haven’t been paying attention to the tech news this last week, Apple has acquired the iOS automation app Workflow. There has been a lot of digital ink spilled on what this could mean for the future of iOS, automation, and the app that many of us love and use daily. I don’t think I really have anything else to add to these particular takes, because there are so many of them, but I do have a different take on the acquisition altogether (as you likely read in the subtitle).
I think it’s only fair to start with the fact that I love Workflow: Powerful Automation Made Simple, and rely on it daily to help me get my work done, as well as to live my life more efficiently. I very much do not want to see it stall out or disappear. As David Sparks points out, “the process is actually faster on my iPad than it is on my Mac.” But I think there’s more to Workflow in the future than just automation, and I want to explore that here.
What is workflow? I’ll quote Matthew Panzarino here, because I think he gave a great, succinct explanation:
“The special sauce of Workflow is that it enables users to dip into specific ‘deep linked’ functions of individual apps and connect those actions together into a string of seamless, invisible commands. If that sounds familiar then you might be thinking of the budding Siri API — which will only be getting more beefy as time goes on.”
“If you spool out the thread here it’s not hard to see Workflow being integrated heavily with Siri, allowing even more seamless activation and composition of actions now that the team has access to Apple’s private APIs, which are more robust than the tiny bit of Siri that’s public so far.”
He also hits on here what he sees as the future of Workflow. I think we’ll likely see this, but I think there’s more to it than he says.
I think it’s really curious that we saw Apple buy the company, rather than just “Sherlock” it. Given Apple’s track record, this is decidedly odd — even look at Night Shift on iOS and now macOS: f.lux would not have been an expensive purchase at all, but Apple instead chose to reinvent the feature of the app for themselves. Workflow is decidedly more complicated than f.lux, but Apple could have written their own rather easily, especially given that they already have the Automator app on the Mac. Therefore, I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that Apple wanted more out of Workflow than just a modern automation app. Granted, Workflow is absolutely better than Automator, in so many ways, and represents so much more of the future than Sal is able to see, but if anybody could Sherlock Workflow, it’s Apple.
A few articles have discussed the possibility that this was an acquihire. They all have come to the conclusion that this is unlikely, considering Workflow is still up on the App Store, has had legal documentation sent out regarding it, and has received an update since the acquisition. I tend to agree with this, especially given the Workflow team is only 3 developers, and Apple just disbanded the automation division (not to mention the fact that I fundamentally believe any of their software team could have built a Workflow copy).
We also should note that as of yet, this appears to be the only iOS (or Mac, even) automation app that Apple seems to be interested in owning internally. Now, we might be wrong about this, an future acquisitions could come up (the Workflow acquisition wasn’t really rumored at all). However, much more powerful automation exists in Pythonista, a full Python IDE that pushes the limits of App Store policy in much the same way as Workflow, and other automation exists in 1Writer — Note taking, writing app and Editorial writing apps, using JavaScript and Python, respectively. The OmniGroup is even bringing an adaptation of JXA automation to their apps, already shipping automation in OmniGraffle. So why is Apple interested in Workflow and not any of these apps?
It certainly has to do with the fact that the rest of this automation requires writing out code, which normal users are decidedly bad at and uninterested in, whereas Workflow uses visual drag-and-drop blocks with excellent documentation, and a level of flexibility that helps non-software-engineers use it. But I think it also relates to Apple’s development and interest in Swift.
Apple, unlike so many other companies, realized that the old programming languages are outdated, and holding computer science back. In their case, Objective C is particularly egregious, but there is still not a good language in wide-spread use. Python is perhaps the best, but it’s too slow to be usable in a lot of cases. So Apple, or more specifically Chris Lattner, developed Swift. It’s a modern language that takes the best elements of the older languages and combines them, I think with the simple human readable aspect of Apple Script, into a language that is incredibly powerful but also revolutionarily approachable. Because of this, Apple have been able to make Swift Playgrounds which is being used as a learn-to-code platform in schools and at home.
Swift is obviously the future of coding, and that’s why it’s open source and available for Mac, iOS, and Linux. But I don’t think it’s the future of the future of coding.
Let me explain what I mean, using a metaphor somewhat-misattributed-to John Siracusa: the infinite time scale. Let’s first explore the evolution of computers from command line interface to GUI. It was not until the GUI was developed that computers were able to push into the mainstream and into the home. Humans are simply awful at interacting with things via written word (even our written languages were first pictures, and only later the far more abstract letters). Now look at the programming languages that kids today are learning on — Scratch and Lego Mindstorms being the major ones. Both of those languages use drag-and-drop block coding interfaces, which hundreds of other learn-to-code apps/games have mimicked. Therefore, on an infinite time scale, does programming end up looking more like typing out Swift, or does it look more like a graphical representation of the same code? I think if you’re looking on an infinite-enough time scale, you’ll see coding looking a lot more like Workflow than Swift.
I’ve already written about how I think Workflow is ready to be a learn-to-code app given its mostly complete set of traditional programming tools. I think it could easily develop into far more of a programming interface, as long as the proper care and development is given to it.
Of course, I can hear all of the current developers (the same ones who think we’ll be using desktop macs, outdated operating systems, and command lines for the rest of forever) screaming about how there will always be code happening at a lower level below the Workflow-type interface, and therefore people will always need to know how to code the old way. To that, I have two points. One: compilers today still work on a lower level than the language people are writing in, and are infinitely more old-school code-y — however, how many people do you actually know today that could write a compiler? It’s not many. So yes, there will be some people in the future that work on translating drag-and-drop blocks into machine code, but they will be a tiny minority with graduate level degrees in computer science. The mainstream will never have to know what they will. Two: the vast majority of people programming today are not writing code for a living — they’re using Automator, Apple Script, Workflow, Hazel, or other simplified automation interfaces that they do not understand in any way the inner workings of. And you know what? That’s perfectly okay.
When programming dumps the written word interface in favor of graphics, more people will be able to use it, more people will use it, and everyone’s lives will improve.
Apple bought Workflow because they are always, and have always, dealt both in the future and the future of the future. Apple are not content to sit pretty with Swift, they want to be ready for the revolution that happens after Swift. Workflow will help them get there. As the master of iOS automation, Federico Viticci, himself says, “Workflow is the modern bicycle for the mind. There’s nothing else like it.” If that doesn’t sound like something Apple wants into, then you don’t know Apple.
In the meantime, Workflow is a tool that will help users better utilize their iOS devices, and will help Apple transition them away from their PC’s and Mac’s and into the future of computing.
