Developers should really be making Universal apps

[mduser63]

For those apps that have both an iPad version and an iPhone version, I agree, they should just have one Universal iPhone/iPad app, even if the two apps are fairly different in functionality due to the screen size/UI differences. However, as a developer, my first iPad app simply won't work on the iPhone as the interface doesn't scale to a small screen well (or small keyboard for that matter). I won't be making an iPhone version separately or as part of an Universal app.

Edit: On second thought, there are cases where I don't think this is true. If an iPad app really takes advantage of the bigger screen, it may end up being much more complex than its iPhone counterpart, justifying a higher price. It's not really fair to make users who only ever want to use it on the iPhone pay the higher price. However, in that case I think a higher-priced Universal app (for iPad and iPad/iPhone users) along with a cheaper iPhone only version makes sense.

 

[zukernik]

I think Apple should simply make it possible to buy a universal version of an app through app purchase, I'm sure many developers would use that to give discounts to people who already bought one version of their software. There are also apps like 1password that charge a certain price for the iPhone/iPad versions and have a universal version that costs less than the other 2 combined.

 

[Andrmgic]

Many iPad specific applications are higher quality than their iPhone counterparts.

To properly take advantage of the iPad's advantages, they need to include higher quality art assets, a different UI design.. it can take a considerable amount of time and effort to do these things.

Sure, the code may be very similar, but code isn't the only thing that goes into these applications. Many of the developers contract out to artists for art assets in their games and other applications, which they would need to do again to produce a proper iPad app.

Your argument is that software should cost the same regardless of the platform, despite whether or not there is more effort involved in producing said software.

The difference between the mac software in your analogy and iPhone vs iPad software is that the games are not designed to take advantage of the mac pro, they are designed for the lowest common denominator to widen their potential market.

iPhone apps are designed for the small screen and lower end specs of the iPhone. There aren't even a lot of games that take full advantage of the superior graphics chip in the 3GS over the slower chips in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G.

If an app for the iPad that was clearly designed for the iPhone, many people would be upset if they purchased it because it doesn't take advantage of their platform in any meaningful way. If you don't want to pay more for apps that take advantage of the iPad's assets (larger screen, more powerful cpu and graphics chip), then certainly no one is keeping you from using your iPhone apps on the iPad and scaling them up.

Personally, apps that take advantage of the iPad relative to the iPhone are far more interesting and worthy of purchase than apps that were intended for the iPhone and just blown up to fit the iPad.

tl:dr version -

Why should developers expend more resources on producing a better version of an iPhone program for the iPad with a nicer interface and higher quality assets if they aren't going to make as much money from it? There is a lot more to apps than code! Feel free to upscale your iPhone apps on the iPad if you don't want to pay for a better version.

 

[jebbe]

Many iPad specific applications are higher quality than their iPhone counterparts.

To properly take advantage of the iPad's advantages, they need to include higher quality art assets, a different UI design.. it can take a considerable amount of time and effort to do these things.

Sure, the code may be very similar, but code isn't the only thing that goes into these applications. Many of the developers contract out to artists for art assets in their games and other applications, which they would need to do again to produce a proper iPad app.

Your argument is that software should cost the same regardless of the platform, despite whether or not there is more effort involved in producing said software.

The difference between the mac software in your analogy and iPhone vs iPad software is that the games are not designed to take advantage of the mac pro, they are designed for the lowest common denominator to widen their potential market.

iPhone apps are designed for the small screen and lower end specs of the iPhone. There aren't even a lot of games that take full advantage of the superior graphics chip in the 3GS over the slower chips in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G.

If an app for the iPad that was clearly designed for the iPhone, many people would be upset if they purchased it because it doesn't take advantage of their platform in any meaningful way. If you don't want to pay more for apps that take advantage of the iPad's assets (larger screen, more powerful cpu and graphics chip), then certainly no one is keeping you from using your iPhone apps on the iPad and scaling them up.

Personally, apps that take advantage of the iPad relative to the iPhone are far more interesting and worthy of purchase than apps that were intended for the iPhone and just blown up to fit the iPad.

tl:dr version -

Why should developers expend more resources on producing a better version of an iPhone program for the iPad with a nicer interface and higher quality assets if they aren't going to make as much money from it? There is a lot more to apps than code! Feel free to upscale your iPhone apps on the iPad if you don't want to pay for a better version.

Couldn't have said it better myself. I think too many people shell out all their money for these devices then are upset cause they can't run all the nice apps without shelling out a little more money. But that's really an entirely different topic which doesn't really need to be discussed here.

 

[Peter Harrison]

<rant>

Am I the only one who feels an app bought on the iPad should also work on the iPhone? I don't think that is an unreasonable request.

I understand the capitalistic structure we have suggests iPad apps cost more, and frankly I don't mind paying it. I just feel a $15 iPad game should include the $7-$10 iPhone version because it is the same code.

A few apps have done that. I am surprised when a game I have pops up with an iPad update (because it is significant added value at no extra cost). Props to them! I don't need iPhone apps to upgrade and do feel that be an unfair request on developers. I just think iPad apps should be universal. If I am paying a premium for the larger screen, I should be given the smaller one too. If not, you are charging a premium with no added value.

</rant>

You have completely overlooked the fact that the iPad apps can take up much more space on the device. If a universal app isn't much bigger on the iPad, fair enough. But for the games that are much bigger on the iPad, why should I have to lose loads of space on my iPhone just because I have an iPad? And for those who don't even have an iPad, why should they have to see their apps increase in size while they gain no extra functionality?

 

[MikePA]

Many iPad specific applications are higher quality than their iPhone counterparts...

You answered all the questions I was thinking about, not being a developer. Thanks!

Essentially, the OPs assumptions are wrong.

 

[jebbe]

You have completely overlooked the fact that the iPad apps can take up much more space on the device. If a universal app isn't much bigger on the iPad, fair enough. But for the games that are much bigger on the iPad, why should I have to lose loads of space on my iPhone just because I have an iPad? And for those who don't even have an iPad, why should they have to see their apps increase in size while they gain no extra functionality?

Not to mention Apple still has a download limit(20mb I think) and if making them Universal pushes that boundary people will no longer be able to download some applications over their data network.

 

[nuckinfutz]

I'm with the OP this one. Many devs are taking advantage of the frenzy and pricing is often unreasonably high.

While making larger assets is indeed more work I feel that asking me to essentially pay double for interface work is ridiculous.

I now give preference to Universal apps so if your competition is offering Universal support your could be losing share.

 

[darwen]

To properly take advantage of the iPad's advantages, they need to include higher quality art assets, a different UI design.. it can take a considerable amount of time and effort to do these things.

Considerable amount of time or the same amount of time?

Sure, the code may be very similar, but code isn't the only thing that goes into these applications. Many of the developers contract out to artists for art assets in their games and other applications, which they would need to do again to produce a proper iPad app.

Fine, contract your artists again and charge me for the iPad version. That is fair, but there is no sense in charging me MORE for the iPad version. I don't buy a PC game expecting it to run on a Mac too, but I do expect it's Mac counterpart to cost me the same when I decide to buy it. That is because while it did cost you to make the different version, it did not cost you more to make it than it did for the first one.

The guys at Gameloft seem to be the only ones getting this. I believe all of the iPhone and iPad apps are priced the same (granted, I only checked the ones I was interested in).

Personally, apps that take advantage of the iPad relative to the iPhone are far more interesting and worthy of purchase than apps that were intended for the iPhone and just blown up to fit the iPad.

I agree. Yet most of the quality games for the iPad are just large screen ports.

Why should developers expend more resources on producing a better version of an iPhone program for the iPad with a nicer interface and higher quality assets if they aren't going to make as much money from it?

I feel they should be making the same money from it.

You have completely overlooked the fact that the iPad apps can take up much more space on the device.

I get the size concerns, I don't really have a rebuttal for those.

You answered all the questions I was thinking about, not being a developer. Thanks!

Essentially, the OPs assumptions are wrong.

My original concern here seems to have been dismissed.

If you want to chrge me more for an iPad app, give me the iPhone version too! That's all I'm saying.

iPad apps should be universal, not all apps are iPad apps though. If you want to iPhone version, buy the iPhone version. If you want the iPad version pay a bit more and get both. That's what I'm saying. If you think this is ridiculous, I'd urge you to take a look at apple's own practices. Buy an HD copy on iTunes and watch it download the SD version too.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

The marketplace will sort things out but ultimately developers need to be given the choice of how they want to market their app. If we want quality iPad apps then they need the incentive of potential additional income for developing for the iPad. Otherwise we are just going to get a lot of shovelware.

As a consumer I agree, I'm not going to pay 2x for the same application just with more resolution. For that I do expect a universal app. But if the developer puts resources into making the iPad version with special features, etc, I will pay again b/c I don't view it as the same application. It would be similar to the relationship between, say, Photoshop Elements and Photoshop CS4. When you buy CS4 you don't get Elements too though.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Top 100 Paid iPad apps.​

Universal apps:

#10 HoloToy
#26 Camera for iPad
#30 Glee
#35 Instapaper
#50 Harmonious
#64 Pin Shuffle
#65 MeeGenius Childrens Books
#75 IM+
#79 Atomic Web Browser
#84 Stategery
#85 AirCoaster XL
#90 LogMeIn Ignition
#92 How To Train Your Dragon
#96 FickrStackr
#99 Parachute Panic HD
#100 AppAdvice

I realize that some apps don't lend themselves be being Universal but the cash grab that some developers are doing is going to cost them in the long run. Universal apps are easier to manage in iTunes (keeps things cleaner than two versions of the same app) which makes it more consumer friendly.

Much of the concern with developers is pricing. They want to do a Universal app but they're concerned about losing sales for iPhone customers by raising the price too high and concerned about revenue by pricing the iPad version too low.

Well I believe if you make a good product the people are going to reward you. Look at Instapaper. Marco didn't double dip and for that he's got my loyalty on future products.

LogMeIn didn't try to ask for another $30 they just delivered an iPad version in an update.

Oh yes the assumption that the app size jumps is incorrect. I've noticed multiple apps go Universal and their file size has not increased significantly at all. Case in point

PrintCentral for iPad = 17.7MB
PrintCentral for iPhone = 15.8MB
PrintCentral Universal = 17.7MB

Look it up if you doubt me. The size excuse is a red herring.

 

[firewood]

Simple economics

There's usually less competition in the iPod portion of the App store. When there's less competition a seller can usually set a higher price point for optimum profits.

People paid more for their iPads. People with both paid even more. People who pay more for hardware will usually pay more for software. So, again, a seller can usually set a higher price point for optimum profits.

Therefore developers with any business sense will segment the markets and do separate apps, with the iPad app priced higher.

Unless the developer is a charity or something... (e.g. why don't you spend most of your time writing apps (for me) for free/cheap?)

 

[nuckinfutz]

There's usually less competition in the iPod portion of the App store. When there's less competition a seller can usually set a higher price point for optimum profits.

People paid more for their iPads. People with both paid even more. People who pay more for hardware will usually pay more for software. So, again, a seller can usually set a higher price point for optimum profits.

Therefore developers with any business sense will segment the markets and do separate apps, with the iPad app priced higher.

Unless the developer is a charity or something... (e.g. why don't you spend most of your time writing apps (for me) for free/cheap?)

I agree with the first part. The iPad is new and thus people are buying apps at pricing that is more expensive than they would normally because they want stuff to play with. I expect that the pricing will decline and more affordable software hits and we're already seeing this. First movers get to make a little extra cash but it's fleeting.

What people pay for a device doesn't necessarily mean they pay more for everything else. I've been in sales for quite some time and the toughest sales where to the people getting out of Jaguar and Mercedes. They have money in the bank for a reason...they don't giving it up freely.

Frankly for a consumer we don't care whether you think you're a charity or not. If the value doesn't meet certain criteria within us all the product is not getting purchased. For some apps that translate well across iPad and iPhone a Universal app could be seen as more valuable. Of the Top 100 paid apps 16% are already Universal. I expect this trend to continue for apps that can work on iPhone as well as iPad well enough.

 

[wjlafrance]

exactly my point. its not universal. how can a developer fit the ipad 'screen' options into the iphone screen? some things will be left out.

And on the 8th day, God created conditional statements.

 

[HiRez]

I'm in favor of doing away with universal apps, in fact I'd like to see the stores for iPhone and iPad separated into their own. However, I do think there should be a mechanism whereby a developer could, when you purchase a certain product, give a credit for another product or products free or discounted. If the developer chooses to make an iPhone version available for free, so be it. But he shouldn't be required to. They really are very different devices.

 

[Zepaw]

I get pretty angry when I see a $1 iPhone app $5 on the iPad. No additon, no new features, just a bigger iPhone app for 5x the price.

The sad thing is it works. Why wouldn't they make apps 5 times what they were worth if people will pay? If they well even 1/5th of what they would have sold at $5, they made more money at $5.

 

[nuckinfutz]

I'm in favor of doing away with universal apps, in fact I'd like to see the stores for iPhone and iPad separated into their own. However, I do think there should be a mechanism whereby a developer could, when you purchase a certain product, give a credit for another product or products free or discounted. If the developer chooses to make an iPhone version available for free, so be it. But he shouldn't be required to. They really are very different devices.

So you're saying that when I put a larger display on my Mac ...my Mac also become a different device?

 

[jebbe]

I get pretty angry when I see a $1 iPhone app $5 on the iPad. No additon, no new features, just a bigger iPhone app for 5x the price.

The sad thing is it works. Why wouldn't they make apps 5 times what they were worth if people will pay? If they well even 1/5th of what they would have sold at $5, they made more money at $5.

You really have no idea what it takes to "make apps bigger". Depending on the application, they may have to almost recreate every bit of artwork, buttons and so on.

It's not as simple as it just displaying it on larger screen. Things also change in the SDK from time to time, so they have to probably update codes or how things work from time to time.

Do you also think that all Developers work for free? Some do, but that's their own decision. They're also paying $99 a year to have access to the SDK to even publish that app you're complaining about shelling out a couple of bucks for their hard work.

Kids these days....

 

[karlth]

I'm a developer and the reason for higher prices is simply that the graphics have to be redone at higher resolutions. Their are usually no coding changes, it is purely down to the graphics.

 

[vertigo235]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

I'm a developer and the reason for higher prices is simply that the graphics have to be redone at higher resolutions. Their are usually no coding changes, it is purely down to the graphics.

Yeah but it isn't 5 times the work.

 

[GFLPraxis]

I get where you are coming from, but...

If you bought a 17" Core i7 MacBook Pro, would you also expect to be given a 13" C2D MacBook too?

Might be a bad example, but in many cases the two apps can be quite different, and for that reason (apart from making extra money...) they sell them separately.

It also helps to reduce application size if they are sold separately.

If I bought an app for my MacBook, I'd expect that it would work on my MacBook Pro too.

 

[karlth]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Yeah but it isn't 5 times the work.

Depends on the program, but it is considerably more work and/or cost. Higher resolution textures need to be much more detailed and there also might be the need for more expensive 3d models.

In the end though the price depends on the potential returns, i.e. income vs. fixed cost. A program developed for the iPad needs to be more expensive than one developed for the iPhone due to volume as otherwise porting/developing for the iPad wouldn't be worth it.

 

[karlth]

If I bought an app for my MacBook, I'd expect that it would work on my MacBook Pro too.

Which is one of the reasons why fewer people develop for the Mac than the iPhone. Different resolutions is a major headache for developers, especially in 2D software development.

I developed for the Windows Mobile platform a few years ago and quit it simply because of the myriad of device resolutions that needed to be supported.

 

[vertigo235]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Yeah but it isn't 5 times the work.

Depends on the program, but it is considerably more work and/or cost. Higher resolution textures need to be much more detailed and there also might be the need for more expensive 3d models.

In the end though the price depends on the potential returns, i.e. income vs. fixed cost. A program developed for the iPad needs to be more expensive than one developed for the iPhone due to volume as otherwise porting/developing for the iPad wouldn't be worth it.

I agree that it depends on the app. I think that there are some apps that certainly deserve some additional cost.

But there are others that really shouldn't cost what sone if the developers are demanding.

 

[chrono1081]

I'm a developer and the reason for higher prices is simply that the graphics have to be redone at higher resolutions. Their are usually no coding changes, it is purely down to the graphics.

+1 unless you do this its hard to understand why everything is more $$$.

When you build an iPad game you have to start the graphics and 3d models (including textures) from scratch again because to sell your game at a higher price, it has to be a higher quality since that is what users expect on the iPad. The 3D models need redone usually for a more detailed mesh, and the textures need redone for higher resolution. You also have to retexture all models because if you have a more detailed mesh that is added geometry.

This takes a LOT of time and is almost the same as starting from scratch.

Second, you have to test everything again, look for graphics glitches, see how your game performs, test, test, and more test.

Then rerelease and wait for the bugs to be reported.

It is a ton of work.