iPad Pro Apple is the iPad Pro's Biggest Problem - Views?

I think i t absolutely is the biggest problem. In the nearish future, i see it being an overall threat to their business model in a sense. If there are two many restrictions that prevent excellent pro level software companies from operating in the app store because their business models aren't sustainable (like free trials), then the need for ever increasing processing powers will start to go to waste and sales may stagnate. The iphone 6s is already rivaling some laptops in performance. Without pro level app support, what's the point of upgrading to a new pro,cessor?

 

its a shame.

i'm sure the Pro's spec is much more than capable of desk top apps, and IOS is capable of running them. so ultimately our experience is now all down to the devs.

 

Free trials are easy to get around, offer a cut down version or a subscription based model. Works for Adobe and Microsoft plus many vendors are moving to SAAS anyway. You can also buy any app try it out and get a refund within 14 days if its no good. I do think that Apple should have the option to trial software then buy it with an in app purchase.

 

To me the biggest problem with the iPad Pro IS the lack of Apple pencils!!! WTF Apple, did you maybe forget to make any or what?

 

It's what you get for desktop class hardware locked by a very restrictive app store...
MacBooks still have the edge.

 

The iPad Pro could have been allowed to do a lot more.

 

Free trial is easy - full features but unable to save file until paid to unlock.

 

With the probable consequence of horrible user reviews.

 

Not necessarily. This is what Microsoft is doing with Office on the iPP. Even with bad reviews, people will still download to try (for free), and buy if they want it.

 

Offer a App version that is cut to try it out. For upgrades dont you can make this happen with in app purchase?
A new app can maybe aktivated over in app restore purchases. Can a new app not restore in app purchase from a old app version?

 

Microsoft's iOS apps are basically offered as a bonus for existing Office subscribers on Windows and Mac. Who cares about the reviews as long as their main revenue comes from the Office 365 subscription. Small developers cannot afford that.

 

Then charge a subscription like Microsoft.

These "small" developers better not be that small when they want $1000 like others mentioned. Bottom line is, if their apps are good, people will pay and there will be a market. Figuring a payment method should not be the hardest part.

 

I agree that there are workarounds in the system, but I think the point is that Apple is both philosophically and in reality a partner to these app developers, and they need Apple to step it up and offer a better way to handle more premium apps in the App Store. A $200 video editing software package shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as a fart machine app; creating a differentiation in presentation and treatment of premium applications should be a priority for Apple if they want the iPP to be seen as a real productivity device, which I firmly believe it can be...with the right apps.

Apple is holding the keys to the kingdom and they are the authors of their own fate. This would be a great time for them to make some bold moves in the App Store to spur continued interest in their platform. iOS can be the future of computing if Apple will get a little more out of the way of developers.

 

That article is a bit shortsighted and narrow in identifying the issue. It's not JUST the app store, but the whole iOS ecosystem.
Apple has developed the iOS ecosystem to have a mobile/disposable mindset... initiated by the iPhone.

Hardware. Annual hardware releases that rely on contract cycles to entice people to upgrade. People using iPhones on contract will rarely keep their iPhone for more than 2 years... simply upgrade and renew the contract. Yes, off contract iPhone sales do happen, but not in large enough quantities to break that cycle.

Apple attempted to do that with the iPad, and for the first few generations it worked. They now see that the hardware cycle for the iPad is longer (approx. 2 years).

OS. Apple refuses to allow for installing previous versions of iOS. Many offer a variety of reasons (read: excuses) for why Apple doesn't allow this but it perpetuates the "forced march" to upgrades that eventually results in having to dispose of hardware that is physically still capable but prematurely crippled. My day-1 iPad 1 (5.5 years old!) is still going strong, still works as smoothly as the day that I bought it. (though the battery is BEGINNING to show its age)

APPS. Not only is there no trial period, but there is no ability for developers to charge for upgrades. There may be a way, depending upon the app to provide updates as "in-app purchases" but that's a bit sketchy. Apps are also seen as "disposable". $0.99 for an app from an unknown developer is one thing, and without a trial period few would be willing to spend $5 or $10 on a no-name developer. The general consensus to this point has been, "aw what the heck, it's just a buck, I'll take a chance". Basically every app is "as-is" with no guarantee of future support. If it doesn't work or stops working, move on to another app.... again, a "disposable" mindset.

It's even more involved than that but basically,
Apple needs shift away from the disposable mindset to a more sustainable one that encourages longevity. That is at odds with an aggressive profit model.

 

That is the problem though, there is a lot of software where a cut down "lite" version wouldn't work because the user can't determine if the full featured app would actually fit their needs. A timed trial is absolutely necessary, and it is crazy that Apple still hasn't implemented it given they have complete control over apps on a users device.

Software as a Service works for Microsoft and Adobe because they are huge. Creative suite has like 20 apps in it to keep a user subscribed. A small company offering a single app can't really compete with that.

The real issue is that Apple only incentivizes getting new users, not keeping current users happy. So in two years when you have a substantial 2.0 upgrade you either give away your work for free to existing users, or you charge everyone full price again. Upgrades would be such a simple thing for Apple to implement as well and they are completely missing.

And then you have the inability to respond to app store reviews, the inability to issue customer refunds directly, and zero visibility for 99% of apps on the app store while paying Apple 30% of your revenue. 30% was a great deal 7 years ago when the app store gave everyone's app visibility and online credit card processing was a bit less accepted (by the general public) but now things are very different, and the only thing the app store does is host a download and charge credit cards. Nowhere near worth a 30% cut anymore.

I'm hoping Google cuts their share to force Apple's hand, but I would much rather Apple do it in the first place.

 

30% isn't a problem, charge what you want plus 30%, not too difficult. It's not free for any software developer to sell their goods on any of the closed ecosystems, whether console or mobile. Apple, like Sony and Microsoft have built the platforms and control them for both their own benefit and for the customers protection. You pay a publisher, distributor and stores to sell your wares why should it be any different for these guys?

Time limited trials should be something that Apple offers and I believe that they should offer a Pro Apps marketplace.

 

The best thing I took from that article is that its clear the iPad Pro is fully capable of running full 'pro' grade apps, nice! It's just a matter of time then, saweet!

It's been said that a sub-category in the App Store for iPad Pro Only Apps could distinguish it from the gazillion other much cheaper and free apps for everything else. That would take the edge off the shock of seeing full price for full pro apps.

 

Totally saw this coming on post on these forums. I'm not a developer. But I saw this fork in the road. I do not think subscriptions are going to be welcomed for this device. While I love my iPP I don't see paying OSX prices without a true file system and multiple windows (more than two). Maybe an iPP app will floor me and I'll eat my words and vote with my dollars. But most iOS apps seems single purpose or limited to a specific function. So, they seem functionally a la carte. So I'm not wanting to spend big bucks on limited functionality. Is this a limitation of iOS? I don't know.

 

I'd go so far as to say that "pro" apps should have their own type of icons. Distinguish them from the riffraff as much as possible. Fix how few icons are on the iPad home screens, then make new "pro" apps double-wide icons that are rectangles. Give them a larger presence on your home screen to subconsciously make up for that larger price.

 

What bottom of the barrel nonsense. Free Trials are not key to successful business models.

Super expensive pro level software sells just fine without free trials. What a joke.