Astropad Studio Launches on iPad With 'Pro-Level Drawing Tools' for $65/Year

[TallManNY]

I don't get the complaints here. If this is pro software for business use, how is $65 a year an issue? I mean what kind of "business" do you guys do in which $65 a year is even a noticeable business expense? Does your "business" have $1,000 a year in revenue and you live off that in a hut? And somehow your business revenue is really small but you have a Mac, an iPad Pro and Pencil (and in case of one commentator above a top of line iPhone that cost nearly $1,000). That doesn't make sense. I mean if you might use this software once or twice a year, then yeah, look for a cheaper solution. But if you are using this once a week or more, then isn't this basically a nothing expense if it works better than what you have? For the business users who say this is too expensive, what do you sell your work product for? Do you work for $5 per hour or something like that and year of this service is a days pay?

The above may seem snarky, I don't mean it to be. I'm genuinely curious. Note, I get how you can have a philosophical objection to paying a subscription. But I just don't get how $65 a year is too high a cost if the product is useful for your business.

 

[campyguy]

I don't get the complaints here. If this is pro software for business use, how is $65 a year an issue? I mean what kind of "business" do you guys do in which $65 a year is even a noticeable business expense? Does your "business" have $1,000 a year in revenue and you live off that in a hut? And somehow your business revenue is really small but you have a Mac, an iPad Pro and Pencil (and in case of one commentator above a top of line iPhone that cost nearly $1,000). That doesn't make sense. I mean if you might use this software once or twice a year, then yeah, look for a cheaper solution. But if you are using this once a week or more, then isn't this basically a nothing expense if it works better than what you have? For the business users who say this is too expensive, what do you sell your work product for? Do you work for $5 per hour or something like that and year of this service is a days pay?

The above may seem snarky, I don't mean it to be. I'm genuinely curious. Note, I get how you can have a philosophical objection to paying a subscription. But I just don't get how $65 a year is too high a cost if the product is useful for your business.

I agree with your questions here, growing professionally with subscription-based necessary applications for my industry like AutoCAD and subscription-based GIS resources (aerials/population surveys/water flow resources provided by local jurisdictions, which, in turn pay dearly for that data from developers) - I bill out $65 in about 15 minutes, and write off my costs. I paid $45 yesterday for some rib cap steaks for guests and myself, and they'll be gone in minutes after they're out of my sous vide setup - the Astropad devs seem to have come up with a completely unique solution that only competes against the upcoming new $1500 Cintiq that isn't even out yet (and I'm considering myself). Given that an iPad cost adds a bit to the $65…

I'd almost hazard that the Astropad team has priced the app and service in order to position themselves for a buyout from Apple, given that the devs are former Apple engineers themselves.

I'm going to try out the demo later this week or after the first bug fix comes out. I'm able to compare it to a Intuos Pro tablet, so I'll be able to compare for myself how the performance works out (I do have the BT wireless kit for my tablet, too…).

 

[newyorkone]

Crippling software that I already paid for, and forcing me to subscribe to get it back??? WTH! Class action lawsuit...

 

[Icaras]

This is why I think Apple will never merge iOS and macOS, and never build a touchscreen Mac to follow Microsoft's Surface Studio.

Just like the awesome Logic Pro X Remote App for the iPad, I think Apple will provide their own elegant touchscreen integration to macOS with the iPad. The cheapest current 27-inch iMac + iPad Air 2 goes for just $2199, which is $800 cheaper than the Surface Studio.

 

[camomac]

I got an email from them earlier today, and I thought WTF. That's just too much money. No thanks.

 

[Dranix]

I don't get the complaints here. If this is pro software for business use, how is $65 a year an issue? I mean what kind of "business" do you guys do in which $65 a year is even a noticeable business expense? Does your "business" have $1,000 a year in revenue and you live off that in a hut? And somehow your business revenue is really small but you have a Mac, an iPad Pro and Pencil (and in case of one commentator above a top of line iPhone that cost nearly $1,000). That doesn't make sense. I mean if you might use this software once or twice a year, then yeah, look for a cheaper solution. But if you are using this once a week or more, then isn't this basically a nothing expense if it works better than what you have? For the business users who say this is too expensive, what do you sell your work product for? Do you work for $5 per hour or something like that and year of this service is a days pay?

The above may seem snarky, I don't mean it to be. I'm genuinely curious. Note, I get how you can have a philosophical objection to paying a subscription. But I just don't get how $65 a year is too high a cost if the product is useful for your business.

Easy - many people do art as a hobby not as a job bringing in money... And then this price is ridiculous.

 

[niun]

This is why I think Apple will never merge iOS and macOS, and never build a touchscreen Mac to follow Microsoft's Surface Studio.

Just like the awesome Logic Pro X Remote App for the iPad, I think Apple will provide their own elegant touchscreen integration to macOS with the iPad. The cheapest current 27-inch iMac + iPad Air 2 goes for just $2199, which is $800 cheaper than the Surface Studio.

My question is this. Why didn't they (Apple)?
You release a "Pro" product. Why not back it up with Pro features at launch. Nothing has peeved me off more than the iPad Pro launch. That will go down as a personal FU from Apple.

Further to this. All MS Surface products run full software from day one. You do not need a further app and subscription to actually use them. When I remove my surface from the screen that Pro software goes with me.

 

[Icaras]

My question is this. Why didn't they (Apple)?
You release a "Pro" product. Why not back it up with Pro features at launch. Nothing has peeved me off more than the iPad Pro launch. That will go down as a personal FU from Apple.

Further to this. All MS Surface products run full software from day one. You do not need a further app and subscription to actually use them. When I remove my surface from the screen that Pro software goes with me.

I can't disagree with you that it's a let down that this hasn't taken place yet, if indeed there is a potential road map to synergize their dual OS agenda in a truly comprehensive and powerful Pro-user experience.

But that said, Apple is like molasses. They're usually slow to move the needle, but once they do move it, it can be that truly giant leap forward. I personally believe they're still cooking stuff up in the R&D labs and are working towards getting everything absolutely right. They have so many awesome technologies that exist now, such as the smart connector, 3D Touch, and the Apple Pencil that would just be mind blowing if it could work with macOS without having to turn the iPad into a Mac itself. And last but not least, it just screams genius business as Apple can continue selling two devices per Pro user rather than just one. I mean it's already sold on me, as a Logic Pro X user, using both my iMac and iPad together has been just incredible. They just need to move in to Final Cut Pro users and allow for other graphic design uses.

I guess we'll just have to keep waiting and see for future WWDC keynotes for any announcements on this kind of development.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

I've never seen that happen, have the 12.9.

As did we. Attempting to freehand in Adobe Graphic was a waste of time and we sold them off.

I kept one, because it's pretty, but after the heavy and unresponsive pencil proved unfit for illustration work, I only use it as an admin machine & mobile second display with Duet.
[doublepost=1484196185][/doublepost]

Which it doesn't, so it's not. Good thing we got that out of the way.

What was that, a delusion in situ?

Perhaps the thread you commented on previously will jog your memory:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ipad-pro-pencil-w-astropad-not-my-video.1938359/
First thread under similar threads I clicked on.

 

[Bbqthis]

What was that, a delusion in situ?

Nope, just over a year of *gasp* professional use.

 

[Floris]

Oh great, another subscription model .. no thank you.

 

[niun]

And last but not least, it just screams genius business as Apple can continue selling two devices per Pro user rather than just one.

Or in my case - work aside - has entirely cut the cord from Apple... I went Surface Pro then Surface Book.. Once that started and I needed a new phone I no longer needed iOS so I turned to Android and picked up a fantastic One +3.

So yeah, Apple had a chance to do things right without having a 3rd party pick up the slack. It should have been a no brainer.

Question. What are you using for Logic Pro and is that specifically for the iPad Pro?

 

[jlc1978]

Crippling software that I already paid for, and forcing me to subscribe to get it back??? WTH! Class action lawsuit...

get a grip. They come out with a version targeted at professional users and still keep the original, in no way did they "cripple" their software. I say this as someone who also has the original software. They could just as easily kill dit but decided to offer two versions so users can chose based on their needs.

 

[az431]

As long as the ipad pro misses the first quarter inch of each apple pencil stroke, it's useless as illustration hardware.

Never seen this.

 

[mkeeley]

I got to beta test this over the past month and it is pretty awesome. I think the subscription route is ridiculous though and I won't be a part of it.
They did claim in their beta email that they won't touch the original (already pretty expensive) app, but we'll see I suppose.

This makes me want to break out the old Xcode and make a free knock-off, which maybe I will.

Sure it is awesome but the one off p

I don't get the complaints here. If this is pro software for business use, how is $65 a year an issue? I mean what kind of "business" do you guys do in which $65 a year is even a noticeable business expense? Does your "business" have $1,000 a year in revenue and you live off that in a hut? And somehow your business revenue is really small but you have a Mac, an iPad Pro and Pencil (and in case of one commentator above a top of line iPhone that cost nearly $1,000). That doesn't make sense. I mean if you might use this software once or twice a year, then yeah, look for a cheaper solution. But if you are using this once a week or more, then isn't this basically a nothing expense if it works better than what you have? For the business users who say this is too expensive, what do you sell your work product for? Do you work for $5 per hour or something like that and year of this service is a days pay?

The above may seem snarky, I don't mean it to be. I'm genuinely curious. Note, I get how you can have a philosophical objection to paying a subscription. But I just don't get how $65 a year is too high a cost if the product is useful for your business.

There's always one who says this, but you spent x on such and such so why are you moaning. That's not the point.

 

[jlc1978]

Easy - many people do art as a hobby not as a job bringing in money... And then this price is ridiculous.

Then don't buy it if you only are doing art as a hobby and find it too expensive. I work on cars as a hobby and can't justify a several thousand dollar diagnostic computer so I make do with a much cheaper, but less featured, version.

 

[az431]

They could just as easily kill dit but decided to offer two versions so users can chose based on their needs.

Everyone needs low latency. If they want to offer a version with additional functionality, great. But what they've essentially done is discontinue performance improvements to the existing app, which already lacks a low enough latency for use in a professional work environment. Those of us who paid the $29 now have to pay another $65 each and every year to get the performance that should be in the basic app.
[doublepost=1484227348][/doublepost]

I don't get the complaints here. If this is pro software for business use, how is $65 a year an issue? I mean what kind of "business" do you guys do in which $65 a year is even a noticeable business expense? Does your "business" have $1,000 a year in revenue and you live off that in a hut? And somehow your business revenue is really small but you have a Mac, an iPad Pro and Pencil (and in case of one commentator above a top of line iPhone that cost nearly $1,000). That doesn't make sense. I mean if you might use this software once or twice a year, then yeah, look for a cheaper solution. But if you are using this once a week or more, then isn't this basically a nothing expense if it works better than what you have? For the business users who say this is too expensive, what do you sell your work product for? Do you work for $5 per hour or something like that and year of this service is a days pay?

The above may seem snarky, I don't mean it to be. I'm genuinely curious. Note, I get how you can have a philosophical objection to paying a subscription. But I just don't get how $65 a year is too high a cost if the product is useful for your business.

The issue is not a single subscription standing alone. Everything is moving to a subscription. By the time you get done paying for Adobe, Astropad, Github, Waffle, LucidChart, Slack, and the dozen other services one uses it easily exceeds $1,000 (especially since many of these are per seat, not per organization). For someone working as a freelancer it could be a quarter of revenue.

Before it was a one-time capital expense, now everything is a recurring cost and over time it ends up costing triple, which is precisely why they are moving to these subscription models.

 

[dannys1]

Ugh, everyone is following this drug dealer business mentality (called subscriptions) now days.

I'm pretty sure drug dealers don't offer subscription models...

 

[niun]

I'm pretty sure drug dealers don't offer subscription models...

I thought drug dealers where the very model of a subscription service.

 

[ericwn]

get a grip. They come out with a version targeted at professional users and still keep the original, in no way did they "cripple" their software. I say this as someone who also has the original software. They could just as easily kill dit but decided to offer two versions so users can chose based on their needs.

My question to the developer is rather: why not just one product and while still pricey make it the best software it can be.

 

[TallManNY]

Easy - many people do art as a hobby not as a job bringing in money... And then this price is ridiculous.

That isn't much of a passion for that hobby if $65 a year is ridiculous. But I get it that what we spend on our hobbies is different than a real professional business expense.
[doublepost=1484235301][/doublepost]

Everyone needs low latency. If they want to offer a version with additional functionality, great. But what they've essentially done is discontinue performance improvements to the existing app, which already lacks a low enough latency for use in a professional work environment. Those of us who paid the $29 now have to pay another $65 each and every year to get the performance that should be in the basic app.
[doublepost=1484227348][/doublepost]

The issue is not a single subscription standing alone. Everything is moving to a subscription. By the time you get done paying for Adobe, Astropad, Github, Waffle, LucidChart, Slack, and the dozen other services one uses it easily exceeds $1,000 (especially since many of these are per seat, not per organization). For someone working as a freelancer it could be a quarter of revenue.

Before it was a one-time capital expense, now everything is a recurring cost and over time it ends up costing triple, which is precisely why they are moving to these subscription models.

Could you really get to over $1,000 per year in subscription fees? And even if you did, if $1,000 per year equaled 1/4 of revenue you have a real problem with your business. You either aren't charging enough or else the market just doesn't value what you produce. And you also shouldn't be working on a $1,000 iPad Pro with a $2,000+ Mac to produce revenue that small. I mean the ability to just do the cogent post on this board shows a level of ability that you should have higher revenue than $4,000 per year.
[doublepost=1484235427][/doublepost]

My question to the developer is rather: why not just one product and while still pricey make it the best software it can be.

Because they want to make more money so they can stay in business. Selling a $29 piece of software a few times (even tens of thousands of times over spread over several years) wasn't going to keep that developer in business.

 

[ericwn]

That isn't much of a passion for that hobby if $65 a year is ridiculous. But I get it that what we spend on our hobbies is different than a real professional business expense.
[doublepost=1484235301][/doublepost]

Could you really get to over $1,000 per year in subscription fees? And even if you did, if $1,000 per year equaled 1/4 of revenue you have a real problem with your business. You either aren't charging enough or else the market just doesn't value what you produce. And you also shouldn't be working on a $1,000 iPad Pro with a $2,000+ Mac to produce revenue that small. I mean the ability to just do the cogent post on this board shows a level of ability that you should have higher revenue than $4,000 per year.
[doublepost=1484235427][/doublepost]

Because they want to make more money so they can stay in business. Selling a $29 piece of software a few times (even tens of thousands of times over spread over several years) wasn't going to keep that developer in business.

Yes the developers want to make more money. That's obvious. Wether it keeps them in businesses is just a guess. Could be just greed.
Maybe it's time for some developers to realise that more than one software product type is needed in order to make a living.
Not everyone is Adobe and can pull a subscription model of.

 

[jlc1978]

My question to the developer is rather: why not just one product and while still pricey make it the best software it can be.

The issue is developing an ongoing revenue stream that supports further development as well as proper customer service. If they charge too much on the outset to ensure having enough money to be an ongoing business they risk not selling enough to stay in business. A subscription model can provide a relatively constant revenue stream so a business can make long term plans for development; as opposed to bringing out a new version every year and seeing a bump in sales and then nothing until the next release.

Everyone needs low latency. If they want to offer a version with additional functionality, great. But what they've essentially done is discontinue performance improvements to the existing app, which already lacks a low enough latency for use in a professional work environment. Those of us who paid the $29 now have to pay another $65 each and every year to get the performance that should be in the basic app.
[doublepost=1484227348][/doublepost]

The buy once version is not intended for professional use and users need to decide what level of performance that want and whether or not it's worth paying for; and the developer is giving them that option. By differentiating products based on price and performance they can get the buyers who are willing to pay more of rtes performance to pay more while not losing those where the cheaper version meets their needs.

Sure, I'd like the $65 version's performance as a free upgrade to my $29 version but it doesn't work that way.

 

[TallManNY]

Yes the developers want to make more money. That's obvious. Wether it keeps them in businesses is just a guess. Could be just greed.
Maybe it's time for some developers to realise that more than one software product type is needed in order to make a living.
Not everyone is Adobe and can pull a subscription model of.

You are right that not everyone can pull it off. But I think you either have to pull of subscription model or else you can't stay in business. I don't know if anyone in the App Store is staying in business selling their Apps with one off prices. They might currently be in business, but I bet almost all of those companies selling one off priced products are struggling. Fundamentally, you need recurring revenue to pay the weekly salaries. And Freemium products are basically subscription deals because their customers buy in app content on a regular basis. It seems like only Freemium and subscription is working these days.

 

[campyguy]

Everyone needs low latency. If they want to offer a version with additional functionality, great. But what they've essentially done is discontinue performance improvements to the existing app, which already lacks a low enough latency for use in a professional work environment. Those of us who paid the $29 now have to pay another $65 each and every year to get the performance that should be in the basic app.

FYI, the iTS has an update issued just yesterday to the original app and it's much more fluid and has much better color matching now. The dev hasn't abandoned the app yet…