PDA

View Full Version : Tweetbot for iPad Hits The App Store




MacRumors
Feb 8, 2012, 02:37 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/08/tweetbot-for-ipad-hits-the-app-store/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/02/tweetbotlogo-150x151.jpg

Popular iPhone Twitter client Tweetbot has finally arrived on the iPad (http://tapbots.com/software/tweetbot/ipad/), with a user interface instantly familiar to any current Tweetbot user. Designed for the Twitter power-user, Tweetbot packs a lot of punch into an intuitive, slick interface, with unique functionality like Smart Gestures (http://tapbots.com/software/tweetbot/ipad/#overview) which give quick access to a variety of features through double or triple-taps.

The Next Web (http://thenextweb.com/apps/2012/02/08/tweetbot-for-ipad-enhances-the-classic-twitter-experience-with-a-speedy-gesture-focused-interface/) and Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/tweetbot-our-favorite-twitter-app-is-back-this-time-with-an-ipad-version-2012-2) have more in-depth reviews.

The app is $2.99 and is a separate purchase from the iPhone app, a fact some users may dislike, but Tweetbot co-developer Paul Haddad explained his thoughts (http://www.businessinsider.com/tweetbot-our-favorite-twitter-app-is-back-this-time-with-an-ipad-version-2012-2) behind the pricing strategy to Business Insider:
People complain that it isn't $.99 or free. But we never said we'd make Tweetbot universal. If you look at the other paid universal Twitter clients they are for the most part $5 and I think we have more features than those, so we're comfortable with the pricing and having separate apps.http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/02/tweetbotscreenshot.jpg


Also released today was Tweetbot 2.0 for iPhone (http://www.macstories.net/reviews/tweetbot-2-0-review/), bringing updated timeline, direct message, and reply views, as well as a number of other smaller changes. It's a solid upgrade that's free for current Tweetbot for iPhone users.

Tweetbot for iPad is available for Direct Link ("]$2.99[/url] from the App Store. [[url="http://itunes.apple.com/app/tweetbot-twitter-client-personality/id498801050?mt=8)]

Tweetbot 2.0 for iPhone is available for $2.99 (http://appshopper.com/social-networking/tweetbot-a-twitter-client-with-personality) from the App Store. [Direct Link (http://itunes.apple.com/app/tweetbot-twitter-client-personality/id428851691?mt=8)]

Article Link: Tweetbot for iPad Hits The App Store (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/08/tweetbot-for-ipad-hits-the-app-store/)



dethmaShine
Feb 8, 2012, 02:41 PM
Okay, I agree the iPhone app is great, but it feels kind of a ripoff even though its just $2.99.

Just make a universal app and sell it for $2.99.

Farplaner
Feb 8, 2012, 02:48 PM
I just wish there is a universal version. Sell it for $3.99. It feels wrong to have 2 separate apps. Oh well.

adztaylor
Feb 8, 2012, 02:49 PM
Absolutely love the iPhone app. Wish they made this universal. Anyone got this yet and want to comment on what it's like?

Moyank24
Feb 8, 2012, 02:52 PM
Absolutely love the iPhone app. Wish they made this universal. Anyone got this yet and want to comment on what it's like?

It's great - it really is. You'll love it as much as the iPhone app. I know people are complaining it's not universal, but if you're on Twitter a lot, it's worth the $3.

yetanotherdave
Feb 8, 2012, 02:53 PM
At least they didn't call it "Tweetbot HD", something that always bugs me as iPad apps are lower resolution than iPhone.
I have no problem with this pricing, they make very nice apps, well worth the money and used daily, and I wont hesitate to buy this, as soon as I get home to my iPad.

xFenixKnightx
Feb 8, 2012, 02:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A406)

Sweet! Buying right when I get home.

chrmjenkins
Feb 8, 2012, 02:59 PM
At least they didn't call it "Tweetbot HD", something that always bugs me as iPad apps are lower resolution than iPhone.
I have no problem with this pricing, they make very nice apps, well worth the money and used daily, and I wont hesitate to buy this, as soon as I get home to my iPad.

1024x768

960x640

WAT

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 03:03 PM
At least they didn't call it "Tweetbot HD", something that always bugs me as iPad apps are lower resolution than iPhone.

:confused:
iPhone 960x640
iPad 1024x768

rockstarjoe
Feb 8, 2012, 03:04 PM
If it is as good as the iphone app it is worth another $3. But I just wish they could come up with a way to keep things in sync between the two (for example, read / unread, messages, etc).

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 03:08 PM
If it is as good as the iphone app it is worth another $3. But I just wish they could come up with a way to keep things in sync between the two (for example, read / unread, messages, etc).

Tweetbot supports syncing through the Tweet Marker service.

hayesk
Feb 8, 2012, 03:13 PM
I just wish there is a universal version. Sell it for $3.99. It feels wrong to have 2 separate apps. Oh well.

Yeah, because people who own both an iPad and iPhone are obviously too poor to pay $4 for something.

And it certainly isn't for the "principle." The developer has to do extra work to make and maintain an iPad version.

Matthew Yohe
Feb 8, 2012, 03:16 PM
Okay, I agree the iPhone app is great, but it feels kind of a ripoff even though its just $2.99.

Just make a universal app and sell it for $2.99.

I just wish there is a universal version. Sell it for $3.99. It feels wrong to have 2 separate apps. Oh well.

How would making it universal and just bumping the price by a dollar (or keeping it the same price as the current iPhone app as dethmaShine suggests) cover their development costs for the iPad version?

Also, it's not like this is just a blown up version of the iPhone app. The folks at Tapbots actually seem to like putting out quality stuff, and if you want them to continue doing so, you can by simply purchasing the iPad app.

yetanotherdave
Feb 8, 2012, 03:18 PM
1024x768

960x640

WAT

:confused:
iPhone 960x640
iPad 1024x768

You can prove anything with facts.
ok, fine, looks lower res than iPhone.

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 03:26 PM
You can prove anything with facts.
ok, fine, looks lower res than iPhone.

You are confusing resolution with pixel density. They are two different things. :D

kristoffer4
Feb 8, 2012, 03:35 PM
I love Tweetbot on the iphone.
I have used Tweetings HD on the ipad up until now so don't know if I will switch but I am very tempted!

calb
Feb 8, 2012, 03:39 PM
Am I alone in thinking it's ugly? I tried to get away with the iPhone version but it reminded me of free forum skins from years back: a matter of personal preference, but a shame given the strong featureset.

NAG
Feb 8, 2012, 03:49 PM
Sheesh, skip your afternoon coffee. Solved your $3 problem. Quality apps cost money and this isn't that much money.

rwilliams
Feb 8, 2012, 03:51 PM
I agree that a universal version is the way to go moving forward. Just increase the price to cover both the iPhone & iPad versions.

As for the developer's comments - I find it perversely amusing that people who will drop several hundred dollars on a device will then complain about spending $3 on quality software for it. Tapbots is an independent 2-man operation. They have to cover their development & push notification expenses somehow.

*LTD*
Feb 8, 2012, 04:46 PM
As for the developer's comments - I find it perversely amusing that people who will drop several hundred dollars on a device will then complain about spending $3 on quality software for it. Tapbots is an independent 2-man operation. They have to cover their development & push notification expenses somehow.

Perfectly stated. We have no problem supporting Apple. So lets support quality developers, who help make the Apple ecosystem a reality.

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 04:52 PM
I agree that a universal version is the way to go moving forward. Just increase the price to cover both the iPhone & iPad versions.

Why should the people that have one device subsidize the price for people that have both an iPhone and an iPad? :)

nutmac
Feb 8, 2012, 04:52 PM
At the end of the day, $2.99 is a good price, especially since the company offers major upgrades for free (e.g., Tweetbot 2.0 for iPhone is free update to previous users) and app offers push notification service at no extra charge.

That said, the app feels like a port of iPhone version than something that is optimized for iPad experience. Left side panel on landscape orientation is absolutely and unnecessarily very wide. Aside from iPad version having both landscape and portrait orientations, there's nothing exclusive nor different.

Farplaner
Feb 8, 2012, 05:01 PM
How would making it universal and just bumping the price by a dollar (or keeping it the same price as the current iPhone app as dethmaShine suggests) cover their development costs for the iPad version?

Also, it's not like this is just a blown up version of the iPhone app. The folks at Tapbots actually seem to like putting out quality stuff, and if you want them to continue doing so, you can by simply purchasing the iPad app.

I'm not saying bumping the price by a dollar. I'm saying, release this iPad app separately, but make this app a universal app that contains the iPhone version as well.

This would be the same price as both iPad and iPhone version currently combined.

nfl46
Feb 8, 2012, 05:02 PM
Its the best Twitter app for the iPhone. I love it.

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 05:22 PM
I'm not saying bumping the price by a dollar. I'm saying, release this iPad app separately, but make this app a universal app that contains the iPhone version as well.

This would be the same price as both iPad and iPhone version currently combined.

:confused: So are you saying iPhone version $2.99, Universal version $5.99? That would just be odd. The same or more expensive for everyone. (Especially if you purchase the iPhone version first. aka Existing customers.)

rwilliams
Feb 8, 2012, 05:31 PM
Why should the people that have one device subsidize the price for people that have both an iPhone and an iPad? :)

Fair enough. But they have to charge something, because every image, sound, etc. in their apps is custom-made, so they're going to have to get that money back from sales.

BaldiMac
Feb 8, 2012, 05:34 PM
Fair enough. But they have to charge something, because every image, sound, etc. in their apps is custom-made, so they're going to have to get that money back from sales.

Definitely. I agree with their choice. I disagree with your suggestion to release a Universal version.

sterumbelow
Feb 8, 2012, 06:04 PM
A-Mazing!

Now all we need is a Tweetbot for Mac App. :)

yetanotherdave
Feb 8, 2012, 06:46 PM
A-Mazing!

Now all we need is a Tweetbot for Mac App. :)

They've said it's being worked on :D

sterumbelow
Feb 8, 2012, 07:29 PM
They've said it's being worked on :D

Whoop. Perfect news. :D

newyorksole
Feb 8, 2012, 08:34 PM
They've said it's being worked on :D

are you serious?! YESSSSSS

yetanotherdave
Feb 8, 2012, 09:09 PM
Whoop. Perfect news. :D

are you serious?! YESSSSSS

that's what he said.
http://twitter.com/tapbot_paul/status/167347789968326656
admittedly, the link is a rick roll, but judging by his general tone, he's serious about the app, but kidding about releasing any sneak peak vids.

thecharrr
Feb 9, 2012, 08:30 AM
Personally, I think it lacks a few features to be really be a power user client:

No multireply feature, nothing like spending lots of time to chain up @s to a question.
Lack of userstream for loading tweets is quite disappointing considering the device's "usual" usage in wifi areas.
More triple tap options: I'd like to open conversation view with triple tap, or have it be an option on the single tap's menu.

joshuaginter
Feb 9, 2012, 10:05 AM
I definitely find the likeness of a cup of coffee to an iPad app amusing. I see the logic behind Tapbots' pricing of Tweetbot for iPad. We have to remember that they are a business and trying to take care of themselves and their families like everyone else.

I think one of the best features about Tweetdeck on Mac and the previous iPad version was the ability to use a saved search as an entire column. I like to follow specific companies closely on Twitter and the ability to have all of the company's tweets in one long column is really nice.

Tweetbot does not have a feature like this and I would love to see one. I understand you can click on the search icon and then click on one of your saved searches. It's not that hard. But with all of the extra space on the left hand side in both portrait and landscape, it seems to me that they have plenty of room to add navigation options. I personally hope putting saved searches on that navigation bar is one of their future updates.

iPad'ers: Rejoice. We have a proper Twitter client.

bronksy
Feb 9, 2012, 11:55 AM
I can't see the settings in Notifications. Am I missing something?

nburwell
Feb 9, 2012, 01:00 PM
While the iPhone app is absolutely perfect, I do agree that they should have made this universal. Needless to say, as soon as I got home from work last night, I deleted my Twitter for iPad app and shelled out the $3 for Tweetbot.

BaldiMac
Feb 9, 2012, 01:01 PM
While the iPhone app is absolutely perfect, I do agree that they should have made this universal. Needless to say, as soon as I got home from work last night, I deleted my Twitter for iPad app and shelled out the $3 for Tweetbot.

Why should they have made it universal?

nutmac
Feb 9, 2012, 01:59 PM
I can't see the settings in Notifications. Am I missing something?

Settings | Account Settings | select your username | Notifications

nburwell
Feb 9, 2012, 02:19 PM
Why should they have made it universal?

Why not?

Obviously I didn't mind shelling out another $3 for the iPad app since it's a well polished app that I use every single day. But it would have been nice to release a universal app for those of us who already own the app on our iPhone.

BaldiMac
Feb 9, 2012, 02:36 PM
Why not?

Obviously I didn't mind shelling out another $3 for the iPad app since it's a well polished app that I use every single day. But it would have been nice to release a universal app for those of us who already own the app on our iPhone.

:D I can see that it would be nice for you to get the iPad version for free. But why should Tapbots do that? Have you really not gotten your $2.99 worth from the iPhone app?

As far as why not, the obvious answer is that Tapbots makes more money by not giving it away for free. From a consumer perspective, it means less space taken up on our devices, more development resources, and more targeted updates. (Why download an update that only applies to the iPad version if I don't have an iPad?) And then there are the people that are paying less than they would for a universal version, because they only have an iPhone or an iPad.

AppleMacFinder
Feb 9, 2012, 03:04 PM
http://www.thedct.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/twitter-logo.jpg + http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/square/000/004/815/lol-guy.jpg = http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/02/tweetbotlogo-150x151.jpg

Richy23
Feb 9, 2012, 05:04 PM
Anyone see an option to view local trending topics? Such as only USA or only UK etc? ...only seem to be able to see the Overall ones..thanks! :D

BergerFan
Feb 9, 2012, 05:08 PM
Tweetbot is an aesthetic marvel, that hides it's awesome functionality superbly.
It doesn't overwhelm you with a plethora of options, but they're all there, under the hood.
Simple, but awesome features such as the swiping of a tweet left and right, to show replies and conversations, respectively, is super intuitive.
Hash tag muting is another great feature.
I have no issue paying for truly great software, and Tweetbot is exactly that.
You can't fully appreciate how good it is just by watching a video.

I call it the Goldilocks of Titter apps. ;)

yetanotherdave
Feb 9, 2012, 06:06 PM
Anyone see an option to view local trending topics? Such as only USA or only UK etc? ...only seem to be able to see the Overall ones..thanks! :D

Accounts and settings -> settings -> username -> trends -> choose your country

kristoffer4
Feb 10, 2012, 05:16 AM
I hope they make a mac App store version next!

ggbrown
Feb 10, 2012, 02:25 PM
This company makes fantastic, quality apps. I own them all.

$2.99 for an iPad version? Take my money!!!

Thank you Tapbots!

G

bronksy
Feb 10, 2012, 06:41 PM
Settings | Account Settings | select your username | Notifications

Sorry- I meant that I can't see tweetbot in my notification Center. I can't see it in the list of apps that would then let me chose how notifications are displayed and change them accordingly.

d3vi1
Feb 12, 2012, 03:48 PM
1024x768

960x640

WAT

:confused:
iPhone 960x640
iPad 1024x768

You can prove anything with facts.
ok, fine, looks lower res than iPhone.

Yetanotherdave, you were right to begin with.

Resolution:
(SNIP)
4. The act of discerning detail.
5. (computing) The degree of fineness with which an image can be recorded or produced, often expressed as the number of pixels per unit of length (typically an inch).
6. (computing) The number of pixels in an image being stored or displayed.

Resolution as in pixel density (like original statement by yetanotherdave):

The statement "The Apple iPhone has a better resolution (326dpi) than the iPad (132dpi)" is absolutely correct.
The statement "The Apple iPhone has a higher resolution (326dpi) than the iPad (132dpi)" is also correct.

Resolution as in number of pixels (like the "correcting" statements by chrmjenkins and BaldiMac):

The statement "The Apple iPad has a higher resolution (786432 pixels) than the iPhone (614400 pixels)" is correct.
However, the statement "The Apple iPad has a better resolution (786432 pixels) than the iPhone (614400 pixels)" is incorrect since bigger isn't always better. An 1920x1200 24" display isn't necessarily better than a 1920x1080 24" display. A 21" 1600x1200 display isn't necessarily better than a 21" 1680x1050 one and so forth.
At least they didn't call it "Tweetbot HD", something that always bugs me as iPad apps are lower resolution than iPhone.
Furthermore, if chrmjenkins and BaldiMac really analysed the semantics of yetanotherdave's statement they would realise that he is right and they are wrong. He referred specifically to the HD suffix everyone adds to their apps. HD as in High Definition refers to a higher pixel density at the same given physical dimensions. A 1080p cinema is not HD (since the pixels would appear enormous), however a 480p movie on an iPhone is perfect HD. A correct usage of the HD suffix would be to add it once an iPhone application is Retina Display compatible.

BaldiMac
Feb 12, 2012, 04:12 PM
Yetanotherdave, you were right to begin with.



Resolution as in pixel density (like original statement by yetanotherdave):

The statement "The Apple iPhone has a better resolution (326dpi) than the iPad (132dpi)" is absolutely correct.
The statement "The Apple iPhone has a higher resolution (326dpi) than the iPad (132dpi)" is also correct.

Resolution as in number of pixels (like the "correcting" statements by chrmjenkins and BaldiMac):

The statement "The Apple iPad has a higher resolution (786432 pixels) than the iPhone (614400 pixels)" is correct.
However, the statement "The Apple iPad has a better resolution (786432 pixels) than the iPhone (614400 pixels)" is incorrect since bigger isn't always better. An 1920x1200 24" display isn't necessarily better than a 1920x1080 24" display. A 21" 1600x1200 display isn't necessarily better than a 21" 1680x1050 one and so forth.

Furthermore, if chrmjenkins and BaldiMac really analysed the semantics of yetanotherdave's statement they would realise that he is right and they are wrong. He referred specifically to the HD suffix everyone adds to their apps. HD as in High Definition refers to a higher pixel density at the same given physical dimensions. A 1080p cinema is not HD (since the pixels would appear enormous), however a 480p movie on an iPhone is perfect HD. A correct usage of the HD suffix would be to add it once an iPhone application is Retina Display compatible.

You can confuse any topic if you just keep switching around definitions. I stand by what I said. The most common uses of the word "resolution" and the term "HD" in the context of screen tech is the total number of pixels, not the pixel density.

Yetanotherdave said "iPad apps are lower resolution than iPhone [apps]." Software doesn't have a pixel density. I have no idea where you got your definition for HD that you described.

chrmjenkins
Feb 12, 2012, 04:57 PM
Furthermore, if chrmjenkins and BaldiMac really analysed the semantics of yetanotherdave's statement they would realise that he is right and they are wrong. He referred specifically to the HD suffix everyone adds to their apps. HD as in High Definition refers to a higher pixel density at the same given physical dimensions. A 1080p cinema is not HD (since the pixels would appear enormous), however a 480p movie on an iPhone is perfect HD. A correct usage of the HD suffix would be to add it once an iPhone application is Retina Display compatible.

BaldiMac addressed the first part of what you said. For this part, yetanotherdave actually acknowledged our correction rather than challenged it and stated he was mistaken. You saying he is correct is therefore mistenterpreting his original intention.

Second, HD is recognized officially as resolutions exceeding 720P. There are zero stipulations on pixel density.

Developers referring to iPad apps as HD is a shortcut to abbreviating their specific intent for the iPad. It does not conform to the official interpretation of the term.

wheezy
Feb 12, 2012, 10:39 PM
That said, the app feels like a port of iPhone version than something that is optimized for iPad experience. Left side panel on landscape orientation is absolutely and unnecessarily very wide. Aside from iPad version having both landscape and portrait orientations, there's nothing exclusive nor different.

The gestures make Tweetbot awesome - and let's face it, all Twitter is is a <ul> of 140 character tweets, how extensive of a design does it need? Also, it is Tweetbot for iPad, so it should look a lot like Tweetbot for iPhone.

When it comes to designing a Twitter app, filling up a 1024x768 display with relevant information isn't as easy as you'd think.

SpaceKitty
Feb 13, 2012, 10:02 AM
So I gather that there is no way to access the public timeline?