My perspective: I've been supporting and working with Mac and iOS developers since the last century, when Apple moved me from Chicago to be an evangelist at Apple HQ in Cupertino. I know as much as anyone about AI-assisted app development, as the creator/maintainer of the free/open source Axiom (https://charleswiltgen.github.io/Axiom/) for iOS/macOS devs.
It's not as dire as you might think. To software developers, the "AI revolution" is largely what the "desktop publishing revolution" was to designers. Yes, it meant the "riff raff" could theoretically play with the pros. Some percentage of the riff raff became pros. Most of the pros eventually adopted the tools and techniques used by the riff raff. Some of the pros didn't survive the transition and happily retired, taking their rubylith, Letraset type, and rubber cement with them.
The silver lining is that most of a software engineer's job isn't coding, it's thinking. LLMs can't do that, and we're not getting to AGI with current AI architectures. LLMs can amplify thinking, and an LLM in the hands of a software engineer or architect is at least two orders of magnitude more effective than it can be in the hands of a vibe coder. As LLMs get better for vibe coders, they also get better for pros.
One can argue that, by the end of the decade, hand-coded [your language of choice] may be considered as unnecessary as hand-coded assembly has been for decades. But coding in modern languages is already 7-8 levels of abstraction above the metal. One more level of abstraction is not the death of software engineering, IMO.
I don't think i fear so much for competing on quality vs a vibe coder, I think two orders of magnitude is underselling the potential snowball effect of a vibe coder attempting to craft up a semi complex project. The sooner they start to pile on complexity, the quicker it is that the 2x gap widens.
The fear for me comes with that initial creation, which is a fear i have across a large amount of things for AI "disruption". Just floods of bad products at rates that are insane, same type of problem that exists on github of just garbage prs, and same thing for any reddit/twitter/even hn type comment thread.
I just do iOS development and my opinion is this: Start with XCode then use an LLM to design and develop it out from there its great. The newer models work great with project files where they used to struggle. Using the Visual Code development tools alongside XCode, claude skills and 3rd party libraries and frameworks with SwiftUI and Swift 5/6 is really convincing me I should make apps full time again. Coding apps has become my dream job.
I had a go at building both a Mac and iOS dictation app the other day (dictator.robgough.net) thinking that with Claude's input, this probably wouldn't work... but it was a real problem I had, and I wanted to see how far we could get. Best way to learn the tools, right? I'd already spent the day playing with alternative apps that didn't quite do what I wanted.
The app itself is fairly straightforward, but it included some intermediate complexity in terms of audio capture and calling local models. Both something I'd never done, and as not-a-mac dev something I probably wouldn't have attempted for a side-project while I'm meant to be bootstrapping my own thing.
I didn't touch a line of code, and I was blown away. I'm so impressed in fact that I'm predicting we'll see a resurgence in native apps in the near future. By far the worst (and slowest) part of the process is having to deal with the App Store, and the ridiculous hoops you have to jump through to get past review.
You need to have an Apple developer account. Then you need to submit your app to Apple for review. Then you need to comply with a list of sometimes arbitrary corrections/requirements that they send back (there is a document that specifies what you need to do, but it is not uniformly enforced in my experience). Then, eventually, you can list your app on the app store.
It’s not super onerous, but it is much more annoying than the theoretical alternative of allowing people to install software of their choosing on their hardware (i.e. download the binary and run it)
For example the iOS app failed first time as I accidentally used "Free" in the app name, and the app declared support for UIBackgroundModes but they were "unable to locate any features that require persistent audio". The dictation keyboard switched you to the app, then if you left would keep recording... fairly basic and obvious stuff. I could have either gone back and argued the case, or simply rip it out which I opted for.
It's now failed again because: The keyboard extension does not provide any functionality when the "Full Access" setting is toggled off.
Well no, hardly my fault you've locked down the usefulness of third-party keyboards, but now I've added a full keyboard in there so it's a bit more useful without that access. I don't expect any users to ever see this. Admittedly this was more frustrating when that would be a couple days work, not just a quick prompt, to fix.
Good luck with your app. Don't worry too much, you can generally work through their issues... but it can be a slow process. Make sure you leave plenty of time between your submission and when you want to launch!
I mean, in general I dislike some of the more extreme app store gating.. but if apps are getting vibe coded with little effort I think gatekeeping is more important than ever. I think "is the author willing to put in the work to pass review" might be a useful heuristic, and it could also prevent things like vulnerable software being published. Plus it amuses me to imagine big tech having to deal with the slop apocalypse they've created!
I suspect AI is going to result in the bottom falling out of the market for simple apps.
React made simple webapps a case of just gluing dependencies together and much more approachable to a generalist developer than the previous generation of web development was. But native apps weren’t affected in the same way. With AI I suspect we’ll see a lot of simple apps, the ones that really aren’t doing much other than CRUD operations on a remote API, become very heavily AI generated by generalist developers.
But there will still remain a healthy market for working on considerably more complex apps.
Will the complex apps be discoverable though, and if not, will the devs bother at all? I feel like this would be a win for old-school open source, where people would do it for the love of the aim, and better vetted app stores like F-Droid might win out
So a bit different from the other comments. We're a wearable company which of course pairs with an app.
We built iOS first because that's what most of our users have, though the team is mostly on Android.
We built our logic in Rust, so that compiles cross platform. It's really just the UI layer that is per platform.
Though I had initially written our first demo in React-Native, the team wanted to go with native UI.
Lately we've been talking about moving the timeline for our Android app up because we can get AI to help using the iOS app as a foundation.
I haven't seen anything really new and compelling in iOS/Android land. The promise of right once run anywhere continues to be a promise, and the bluetooth libraries across different devices (particularly in Android land) has me concerned.
you can write your own plugins for anything native and just call it. we have a app that uses many native SDK calls which we write plugins for and call.
not to mention that once the native work is done you can deploy ui level changes and new features, bug fixes to users over OTA.
i’m just an outsider so i know my lane. but
whatever you do, do not allow bike shedding and ultra opinionated tech nerds to derail company vision timelines.
AI has made it much easier to build an app, but distribution hasn't gotten any easier. Getting through App Store review, acquiring users, and retaining them still feels like 90% of the battle.
I am building an app that is for a niche market, and I wouldn't have started without LLMs.
The hard part of this app is great design, requiring intentionally designed workflows and lots of real world testing. The code isn't the interesting part and now code isn't taking most of my time. It's great!
Once the design is nailed down and workflows tightened up, I don't expect much active development and can focus on distribution and marketing.
As a solo dev, this feels totally doable but ask me in 6 months.
I don't install apps unless it's for an event or something. I just make my own to fit my needs. I can get a functional pwa out in about a day or two now.
AI Coding is great helper but not a substitutue for producing decent looking apps.
Anytime I let lose AI (Both Codex and Claude), they end up producing slop that is overcomplicated, and that looks like a generic tutorial interface. Great for toy apps but not for serious one.
When I do most of the architecture, and use AI to 'fill in the blanks' or just finish some functionality here and there, then AI is great.
The main reason is that it is trained by public code that is mostly tutorials, and simple apps, so AI can't build a great looking one by itself (or it doesn't how to do large apps). But for specific features, it is great.
TLDR: It is still a 'fill in the funcionality here' type of help. Folks that are successful with letting 'multiple agents' running in the background are mostly for backend work where the results are easier to verify.
Also, there is a lot of LARPING in twitter sphere exaggerating what AI can realistically do right now. But I can see how it can affect entry level jobs. AI is still like an CS intern, or very very junior engineer.
My perspective: I've been supporting and working with Mac and iOS developers since the last century, when Apple moved me from Chicago to be an evangelist at Apple HQ in Cupertino. I know as much as anyone about AI-assisted app development, as the creator/maintainer of the free/open source Axiom (https://charleswiltgen.github.io/Axiom/) for iOS/macOS devs.
It's not as dire as you might think. To software developers, the "AI revolution" is largely what the "desktop publishing revolution" was to designers. Yes, it meant the "riff raff" could theoretically play with the pros. Some percentage of the riff raff became pros. Most of the pros eventually adopted the tools and techniques used by the riff raff. Some of the pros didn't survive the transition and happily retired, taking their rubylith, Letraset type, and rubber cement with them.
The silver lining is that most of a software engineer's job isn't coding, it's thinking. LLMs can't do that, and we're not getting to AGI with current AI architectures. LLMs can amplify thinking, and an LLM in the hands of a software engineer or architect is at least two orders of magnitude more effective than it can be in the hands of a vibe coder. As LLMs get better for vibe coders, they also get better for pros.
One can argue that, by the end of the decade, hand-coded [your language of choice] may be considered as unnecessary as hand-coded assembly has been for decades. But coding in modern languages is already 7-8 levels of abstraction above the metal. One more level of abstraction is not the death of software engineering, IMO.
I don't think i fear so much for competing on quality vs a vibe coder, I think two orders of magnitude is underselling the potential snowball effect of a vibe coder attempting to craft up a semi complex project. The sooner they start to pile on complexity, the quicker it is that the 2x gap widens.
The fear for me comes with that initial creation, which is a fear i have across a large amount of things for AI "disruption". Just floods of bad products at rates that are insane, same type of problem that exists on github of just garbage prs, and same thing for any reddit/twitter/even hn type comment thread.
I just do iOS development and my opinion is this: Start with XCode then use an LLM to design and develop it out from there its great. The newer models work great with project files where they used to struggle. Using the Visual Code development tools alongside XCode, claude skills and 3rd party libraries and frameworks with SwiftUI and Swift 5/6 is really convincing me I should make apps full time again. Coding apps has become my dream job.
https://github.com/LeoMobileDeveloper/ios-developer-tools
https://github.com/AvdLee/SwiftUI-Agent-Skill
I had a go at building both a Mac and iOS dictation app the other day (dictator.robgough.net) thinking that with Claude's input, this probably wouldn't work... but it was a real problem I had, and I wanted to see how far we could get. Best way to learn the tools, right? I'd already spent the day playing with alternative apps that didn't quite do what I wanted.
The app itself is fairly straightforward, but it included some intermediate complexity in terms of audio capture and calling local models. Both something I'd never done, and as not-a-mac dev something I probably wouldn't have attempted for a side-project while I'm meant to be bootstrapping my own thing.
I didn't touch a line of code, and I was blown away. I'm so impressed in fact that I'm predicting we'll see a resurgence in native apps in the near future. By far the worst (and slowest) part of the process is having to deal with the App Store, and the ridiculous hoops you have to jump through to get past review.
could you talk more about the hoops? i’m getting close to the point i’d like to release something and it’d be my first time.
You need to have an Apple developer account. Then you need to submit your app to Apple for review. Then you need to comply with a list of sometimes arbitrary corrections/requirements that they send back (there is a document that specifies what you need to do, but it is not uniformly enforced in my experience). Then, eventually, you can list your app on the app store.
It’s not super onerous, but it is much more annoying than the theoretical alternative of allowing people to install software of their choosing on their hardware (i.e. download the binary and run it)
Exactly this.
For example the iOS app failed first time as I accidentally used "Free" in the app name, and the app declared support for UIBackgroundModes but they were "unable to locate any features that require persistent audio". The dictation keyboard switched you to the app, then if you left would keep recording... fairly basic and obvious stuff. I could have either gone back and argued the case, or simply rip it out which I opted for.
It's now failed again because: The keyboard extension does not provide any functionality when the "Full Access" setting is toggled off.
Well no, hardly my fault you've locked down the usefulness of third-party keyboards, but now I've added a full keyboard in there so it's a bit more useful without that access. I don't expect any users to ever see this. Admittedly this was more frustrating when that would be a couple days work, not just a quick prompt, to fix.
Good luck with your app. Don't worry too much, you can generally work through their issues... but it can be a slow process. Make sure you leave plenty of time between your submission and when you want to launch!
I mean, in general I dislike some of the more extreme app store gating.. but if apps are getting vibe coded with little effort I think gatekeeping is more important than ever. I think "is the author willing to put in the work to pass review" might be a useful heuristic, and it could also prevent things like vulnerable software being published. Plus it amuses me to imagine big tech having to deal with the slop apocalypse they've created!
I suspect AI is going to result in the bottom falling out of the market for simple apps.
React made simple webapps a case of just gluing dependencies together and much more approachable to a generalist developer than the previous generation of web development was. But native apps weren’t affected in the same way. With AI I suspect we’ll see a lot of simple apps, the ones that really aren’t doing much other than CRUD operations on a remote API, become very heavily AI generated by generalist developers.
But there will still remain a healthy market for working on considerably more complex apps.
Will the complex apps be discoverable though, and if not, will the devs bother at all? I feel like this would be a win for old-school open source, where people would do it for the love of the aim, and better vetted app stores like F-Droid might win out
>Will the complex apps be discoverable though
That is the real issue. How to get noticed in a sea of slop.
So a bit different from the other comments. We're a wearable company which of course pairs with an app.
We built iOS first because that's what most of our users have, though the team is mostly on Android.
We built our logic in Rust, so that compiles cross platform. It's really just the UI layer that is per platform.
Though I had initially written our first demo in React-Native, the team wanted to go with native UI.
Lately we've been talking about moving the timeline for our Android app up because we can get AI to help using the iOS app as a foundation.
I haven't seen anything really new and compelling in iOS/Android land. The promise of right once run anywhere continues to be a promise, and the bluetooth libraries across different devices (particularly in Android land) has me concerned.
> We built our logic in Rust, so that compiles cross platform. It's really just the UI layer that is per platform.
Having never created a mobile app, how's that work exactly?
why was your team against react native?
you can ship the actual UI stuff in seconds.
you can write your own plugins for anything native and just call it. we have a app that uses many native SDK calls which we write plugins for and call.
not to mention that once the native work is done you can deploy ui level changes and new features, bug fixes to users over OTA.
i’m just an outsider so i know my lane. but
whatever you do, do not allow bike shedding and ultra opinionated tech nerds to derail company vision timelines.
AI has made it much easier to build an app, but distribution hasn't gotten any easier. Getting through App Store review, acquiring users, and retaining them still feels like 90% of the battle.
I am building an app that is for a niche market, and I wouldn't have started without LLMs.
The hard part of this app is great design, requiring intentionally designed workflows and lots of real world testing. The code isn't the interesting part and now code isn't taking most of my time. It's great!
Once the design is nailed down and workflows tightened up, I don't expect much active development and can focus on distribution and marketing.
As a solo dev, this feels totally doable but ask me in 6 months.
It is bad. Layoffs everywhere. Google is becoming apple. Companies want you to do the job of 6 engineers using ai.
The market is saturated for new apps.
I’ll be curious to see how many new vibe coded apps make it to a 2.0
I don't install apps unless it's for an event or something. I just make my own to fit my needs. I can get a functional pwa out in about a day or two now.
I'm have a game on both app stores, built in .net Maui. It earns enough to keep a roof over my head.
AI is useless when developing with Maui, as it's too new of a development framework for any AI's knowledgebase to have a clue what to do with it.
https://github.com/dotnet/maui/wiki/Using-AI-to-Work-on-.NET...
I’ve been thinking about this—if I wanted to learn iOS dev where should I start? (Book preferred.)
Mostly for fun/scratch my own itch, and using AI as a companion/helper device.
It's incredibly easy to make apps nowadays, it's all about distribution (usually on social media).
AI Coding is great helper but not a substitutue for producing decent looking apps.
Anytime I let lose AI (Both Codex and Claude), they end up producing slop that is overcomplicated, and that looks like a generic tutorial interface. Great for toy apps but not for serious one.
When I do most of the architecture, and use AI to 'fill in the blanks' or just finish some functionality here and there, then AI is great.
The main reason is that it is trained by public code that is mostly tutorials, and simple apps, so AI can't build a great looking one by itself (or it doesn't how to do large apps). But for specific features, it is great.
TLDR: It is still a 'fill in the funcionality here' type of help. Folks that are successful with letting 'multiple agents' running in the background are mostly for backend work where the results are easier to verify.
Also, there is a lot of LARPING in twitter sphere exaggerating what AI can realistically do right now. But I can see how it can affect entry level jobs. AI is still like an CS intern, or very very junior engineer.