IPhone apps and ipad apps charged separately?

[steffi]

So developers will be encouraged to charge twice since this makes more money for apple or will ipad apps also be sold as iPhone apps for the same purchase?

For instance tweetie for iPhone will be charged differently than the same product for ipad?

 

[anti-microsoft]

So developers will be encouraged to charge twice since this makes more money for apple or will ipad apps also be sold as iPhone apps for the same purchase?

For instance tweetie for iPhone will be charged differently than the same product for ipad?

Most probably, and unfortunately, yes.

Let me put you an example (I know it doesn't strictly compare, but anyway): If you buy tweetie for Mac, you don't get tweetie for iPhone free. So I suppose it will be the same on the iPad.

 

[steffi]

If I'm to pay extra for the ipad application it had better have additional features over the iPhone app and not just higher resolution. Where possible apple should be encouraging developers to pacakage both versions of the app in the same unit of purchase and not separately but I doubt this will happen. Develoers will be salivating at the chance to charge again for ipad versions of their apps citing the vinyl vs cd debate

Most probably, and unfortunately, yes.

Let me put you an example (I know it doesn't strictly compare, but anyway): If you buy tweetie for Mac, you don't get tweetie for iPhone free. So I suppose it will be the same on the iPad.

 

[bndoarn]

I was thinking the exact same thing. The brushes application specifically for the iPad looked pretty much the same except for the playback of your actions and the ability to save colors. I don't think that justifies buying it all over again. If I do get the iPad, I'll most likely just use the iPhone version of applications I already have and not buy a iPad version. For new apps I would probably just buy an iPad version or more desktop like apps and buy only an iPhone versions for more mobile apps like games.

 

[bnerd]

Actually Apple is asking developers to do the opposite. They are asking us to create Universal binaries of our apps .. almost like Mac did with PowerPC/Intel apps.

Apple are telling us developers that the customer should buy once and run on any iPhoneOS supported device.

So if you go into the App Store and see developers doing otherwise.. you should NOT support them.. because Apple has advised us against this practice.

 

[Paul B]

Actually Apple is asking developers to do the opposite. They are asking us to create Universal binaries of our apps .. almost like Mac did with PowerPC/Intel apps.

Apple are telling us developers that the customer should buy once and run on any iPhoneOS supported device.

So if you go into the App Store and see developers doing otherwise.. you should NOT support them.. because Apple has advised us against this practice.

Wow, nice. Thanks.

 

[admanimal]

Actually Apple is asking developers to do the opposite. They are asking us to create Universal binaries of our apps .. almost like Mac did with PowerPC/Intel apps.

Apple are telling us developers that the customer should buy once and run on any iPhoneOS supported device.

So if you go into the App Store and see developers doing otherwise.. you should NOT support them.. because Apple has advised us against this practice.

You are correct that Apple's official stance is to promote universal apps, which is fine.

However, I wouldn't be so harsh against developers who do otherwise, or who release completely new versions of their apps (i.e. that you have to buy again rather than just upgrading) that are universal. The reason is that it is going to take a significant effort to create good iPad versions of any iPhone apps, and I don't think that consumers should expect to get a free iPad version just because they bought the corresponding iPhone app. It would kind of be like expecting to get Halo 3 for free on your Xbox 360 just because you had purchased Halo 2 for the original Xbox. Obviously if a developer puts out a half-arsed iPad version just to cash in, then by all means vote against that with your wallet.

 

[bnerd]

You are correct that Apple's official stance is to promote universal apps, which is fine.

However, I wouldn't be so harsh against developers who do otherwise, or who release completely new versions of their apps (i.e. that you have to buy again rather than just upgrading) that are universal. The reason is that it is going to take a significant effort to create good iPad versions of any iPhone apps, and I don't think that consumers should expect to get a free iPad version just because they bought the corresponding iPhone app. It would kind of be like expecting to get Halo 3 for free on your Xbox 360 just because you had purchased Halo 2 for the original Xbox. Obviously if a developer puts out a half-arsed iPad version just to cash in, then by all means vote against that with your wallet.

You do make some valid points. I just think if a developer DOES decide to charge twice they should be introducing some major enhancements over the iPhone version besides just a larger interface. I say this because the coding effort between developing for the iPhone to iPad is VERY small.. in fact there are only a few new elements in the SDK that are iPad only.

So you're right, if a developer feels they are adding great new features, enough to charge their customers twice then great. But for those developers that are just porting their apps to a larger screen.. they should give the customer a break.

 

[steffi]

Other than the Sdk itself which is probably NDA where has apple made it's stance on this issue known?

Actually Apple is asking developers to do the opposite. They are asking us to create Universal binaries of our apps .. almost like Mac did with PowerPC/Intel apps.

Apple are telling us developers that the customer should buy once and run on any iPhoneOS supported device.

So if you go into the App Store and see developers doing otherwise.. you should NOT support them.. because Apple has advised us against this practice.

 

[admanimal]

Other than the Sdk itself which is probably NDA where has apple made it's stance on this issue known?

It's in the SDK docs. We could tell you more but then we'd have to kill you.

 

[anti-microsoft]

Right, so if Developers can build universal apps that work on all type of device that runs the iPhone OS, what happens to the people who have bought an iPhone App pre-iPad? So, if say, I bought brushes for the iPhone and then the iPad version came along, would I be able to download it free of charge?

Ams.

PS: Off topic but is there any mention of iTunes Extras and iTunes LP compatibility with the iPad?

 

[bnerd]

Right, so if Developers can build universal apps that work on all type of device that runs the iPhone OS, what happens to the people who have bought an iPhone App pre-iPad? So, if say, I bought brushes for the iPhone and then the iPad version came along, would I be able to download it free of charge?

Ams.

PS: Off topic but is there any mention of iTunes Extras and iTunes LP compatibility with the iPad?

The ideal outcome would be that the developer would update their AppStore download to now be the universal binary file. So the users of the app won't notice anything different unless the developer includes in the update notes that now this app can run on both iPhone & iPad.

The goal of Apple is that this process should be invisible to the end user. They shouldn't have to do ANYTHING to enjoy their purchased apps on all iPhoneOS devices. But like admanimal stated.. some developers may want to charge more for iPad apps... but I doubt we'll see a lot of that now that competition is thick in the store.

Can't really go into detail on anything more on the SDK because its currently under NDA due to it being in BETA.

 

[admanimal]

Right, so if Developers can build universal apps that work on all type of device that runs the iPhone OS, what happens to the people who have bought an iPhone App pre-iPad? So, if say, I bought brushes for the iPhone and then the iPad version came along, would I be able to download it free of charge?
?

It isn't totally clear whether developers will be able to update their existing iPhone apps with universal versions, but assuming that is the case, then it seems possible to get the universal/iPad version for free just by updating.

Like I said though, I don't think consumers should expect to get an iPad version for free just because you already own the iPhone version. Devs deserve to get paid for the work of creating a totally separate app.

 

[goosnarrggh]

It's in the SDK docs. We could tell you more but then we'd have to kill you.

Don't worry. The NDA currently only applies to pre-release versions of the SDK. For mainstream release versions of the SDK, the NDA has been lifted and it is permissible to discuss every documented procedure.

Presumably, when the pre-release SDK enters mainstream release, it will be OK to openly discuss the existence and substance of any procedures for producing universal iPhoneOS apps.

To the OP: If you're already satisfied with the experience you get from your existing iPhone App, it's already been demonstrated that the vast majority of them (probably all of them that don't require iPhone specific hardware such as a camera) will run in place on the iPad without modification anyway. If you don't need any extra features that may be delivered in the iPad-specific version of the app, it's already been announced that you're absolutely permitted to go right on using the iPhone version of the app on your iPad and pay nothing.