No more iPhone AND iPad apps

[Dwalls90]

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.

 

[thewitt]

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...

 

[Eckscaliber]

I prefer a universal app. I understand your irritation.

 

[trvsglr]

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.

 

[Mak47]

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.

 

[thewitt]

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.

 

[marc11]

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?

 

[m00min]

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).

 

[Demarca]

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

 

[marc11]

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.

 

[m00min]

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.

----------

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.

 

[Demarca]

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.

 

[kylera]

I'm with you there. Though, I've seen some apps that have excellent separate versions like MyFitnessPal.