Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Applications > iPhone and iPod touch Apps

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 6, 2012, 09:51 PM   #1
Dwalls90
macrumors 68040
 
Dwalls90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
No more iPhone AND iPad apps

Why is it developers can't just make an app compatible for both the iPhone AND iPad ... rather then releasing a separate .ipa for both platforms?

For example:

Bank of America iPad

Bank of America iPhone

WHY is there the need for two apps? Most developers fit it all into one package, why can't you!?

Another irritation:

Apps that are split for each platform to change the pricing model. Angry Birds isn't any more fun on my iPad then it is on my iPhone! So why are you charging me three times as much! Furthermore, it's just cumbersome to maintain multiple versions of the same app in my library! It's very un-apple like and messy.

Any thoughts or experiences? IMO the smart developers have already done this, but there are quite a handful that haven't learnt yet.
__________________
MacBook Pro 2820QM + iPhone 5s
Dwalls90 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 11:39 PM   #2
thewitt
macrumors 68000
 
thewitt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Though the situation will be different for every case, I can tell you one of our customers hired us to do their iPhone app, and another company to do their iPad app - both at the same time. They did not want a universal app...
thewitt is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2012, 11:43 PM   #3
Eckscaliber
macrumors 6502a
 
Eckscaliber's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
I prefer a universal app. I understand your irritation.
Eckscaliber is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 12:52 AM   #4
trvsglr
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
I would like to see more apps that work together on each device. For example I play The Simpsons Tapped Out game and I love the fact that when I play it on my iPhone, then later when I get home, I'll decide to play on my iPad and what I completed on my phone now shows up on my tablet even though I didn't do it on my tablet. I don't like games that make you choose one deivce or the other to play on. It's nice at home to use my iPad and then I can also pick up where I left off on my phone when I leave.
__________________
16 GB White iPhone 5
16 GB Black iPad mini
Apple TV3
trvsglr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 12:57 AM   #5
Mak47
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Harrisburg, PA
I can understand the desire for simplicity in most apps, but some do serve different purposes.

For example, the eTrade app has a totally different interface on the iPad than it does on the iPhone. The iPad app takes advantage of the larger screen and offers more functionality and larger touch targets.

I'd imagine that most apps could be delivered as a single package, despite being different from one device to another, but I can imagine some cases where that wouldn't be ideal.
Mak47 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 01:00 AM   #6
thewitt
macrumors 68000
 
thewitt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
The universal app is harder to create, but not so much that it should not be the norm.

Integration between apps using iCloud or application servers to keep two devices in sync is also not that difficult, though you do have to be careful when you have offline updates so that you don't erase real updates. This can take a little extra design work.
thewitt is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 01:15 AM   #7
marc11
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NY USA
Could it be profit driven in the case of paid apps? Two apps, means, if you want it on two devices you have to buy it twice, universal app goes on everything you own?
__________________
Various Apple Products
marc11 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 01:28 AM   #8
m00min
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc11 View Post
Could it be profit driven in the case of paid apps? Two apps, means, if you want it on two devices you have to buy it twice, universal app goes on everything you own?
I can understand if it is price driven if the price is only somewhere around the 2 mark. If it's a useful app then spending 4 total is still cheap. I'm always disappointed when I see one star reviews in the AppStore because someone thinks 2 is expensive If the app costs 20 that's another matter (I'm looking at you Omni).

Apple need to add a mechanism for payed updates, it might solve this; pay for the basic app, then pay maybe 50% more for the extra screen size (not specifically per device though. Those with iPhones and iPod's shouldn't be charged for that, it's the same format).
__________________
Obligatory dick waving: 2012 i7/8GB/256SSD MBA; 2010 i7/8GB/256SSD MBP; 2006 Mac Mini; iPhone 4S; iPad 3
m00min is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 01:47 AM   #9
Demarca
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Poland
I prefer universal apps too. But since the iPad with retina came, there is a new problem - total size of the app.
As a developer, I can say that it is not easy to decide whether to make universal (and large), or separate for iPhone and iPad versions, so I could stay below the 50MB mark.
My last universal app contains multiple images (it runs offline) and the file is large because of the new iPad's retina resolution. This could be a drawback for someone with iPhone only...

Regards,
Marek
__________________
www.demarca.pl - some apps for your iPhone & iPad
Demarca is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 02:06 AM   #10
marc11
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NY USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by m00min View Post
I can understand if it is price driven if the price is only somewhere around the 2 mark. If it's a useful app then spending 4 total is still cheap. I'm always disappointed when I see one star reviews in the AppStore because someone thinks 2 is expensive If the app costs 20 that's another matter (I'm looking at you Omni).

Apple need to add a mechanism for payed updates, it might solve this; pay for the basic app, then pay maybe 50% more for the extra screen size (not specifically per device though. Those with iPhones and iPod's shouldn't be charged for that, it's the same format).
Careful there, then maybe we are charged differently based on screen size for Macbooks and iMacs too...I am also leary of paid updates; while I do not mind paying for a true upgrade you have to watch between paying for actual enhancements and paying for poor programming and bug fixes.
__________________
Various Apple Products
marc11 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 03:31 AM   #11
m00min
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc11 View Post
Careful there, then maybe we are charged differently based on screen size for Macbooks and iMacs too...I am also leary of paid updates; while I do not mind paying for a true upgrade you have to watch between paying for actual enhancements and paying for poor programming and bug fixes.
Paying for an app that's a scaled up copy would not be acceptable, some apps are completely redesigned for the iPad, it's those that I'm referring to.

App devs that tried to charge for bug fixes would probably find their apps getting panned in the reviews.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Demarca View Post
I prefer universal apps too. But since the iPad with retina came, there is a new problem - total size of the app.
As a developer, I can say that it is not easy to decide whether to make universal (and large), or separate for iPhone and iPad versions, so I could stay below the 50MB mark.
My last universal app contains multiple images (it runs offline) and the file is large because of the new iPad's retina resolution. This could be a drawback for someone with iPhone only...

Regards,
Marek
This is where it would be handy if you were able to use SVG instead of raster graphics (I'm assuming that isn't the case currently, I'm not an app dev), teeny file sizes that scale nicely. No good for photographs but great for interface stuff.
__________________
Obligatory dick waving: 2012 i7/8GB/256SSD MBA; 2010 i7/8GB/256SSD MBP; 2006 Mac Mini; iPhone 4S; iPad 3
m00min is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 03:49 AM   #12
Demarca
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Poland
Quote:
Originally Posted by m00min View Post
This is where it would be handy if you were able to use SVG instead of raster graphics (I'm assuming that isn't the case currently, I'm not an app dev), teeny file sizes that scale nicely. No good for photographs but great for interface stuff.
Yes, it is possible to use vector graphics, but as you said, it's no good for photos.

The other thing I can see is that the iPhone version is often just an "advert" for the "big", iPad version. Developer tries to get some money only from the iPad market, because iPhone market is somehow spoiled with constant 0.00-0.99 promotions.
__________________
www.demarca.pl - some apps for your iPhone & iPad
Demarca is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2012, 04:22 AM   #13
kylera
macrumors 6502a
 
kylera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Seoul
I'm with you there. Though, I've seen some apps that have excellent separate versions like MyFitnessPal.
__________________
Current Macs: 2012 13" MBA | 2011 27" iMac | PowerBook G4 12" | eMac 700Mhz
Current iOS: iPad 4 3G 64GB | iPhone 4S 16GB
kylera is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Applications > iPhone and iPod touch Apps

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC