Apple approves iPad apps, developers choose 'HD,' 'XL' names
With the iPad just over a week away from release, Apple has begun approving applications for the App Store, and developers are distinguishing their iPad-specific applications as "HD" or XL" versions.
Some iPad applications have already been approved by Apple and are listed in the Web-based iTunes Preview list of App Store software, as first discovered by PadGadget. Developers have chosen to label their iPad applications as "HD" or "XL" versions to distinguish them from their iPhone and iPod touch counterparts.
But iPhone and iPod touch users will not be able to access iPad applications from those devices, as the new software is specifically written for the 9.7-inch display on Apple's forthcoming hardware.
Titles discovered so far are games, including Plants vs. Zombies HD, Flight Control HD, Labyrinth 2 HD and Worms HD.
Last week, Apple began accepting submissions for iPad applications on the App Store. The appearance of software in iTunes Preview would suggest that they were whisked through the approval process in under a week.
In addition to iPad-specific software, the new device will be able to run virtually all of the existing App Store software, which has more than 150,000 applications. The Wi-Fi-only version of the hardware will go on sale in the U.S. on April 3.
Some iPad applications have already been approved by Apple and are listed in the Web-based iTunes Preview list of App Store software, as first discovered by PadGadget. Developers have chosen to label their iPad applications as "HD" or "XL" versions to distinguish them from their iPhone and iPod touch counterparts.
But iPhone and iPod touch users will not be able to access iPad applications from those devices, as the new software is specifically written for the 9.7-inch display on Apple's forthcoming hardware.
Titles discovered so far are games, including Plants vs. Zombies HD, Flight Control HD, Labyrinth 2 HD and Worms HD.
Last week, Apple began accepting submissions for iPad applications on the App Store. The appearance of software in iTunes Preview would suggest that they were whisked through the approval process in under a week.
In addition to iPad-specific software, the new device will be able to run virtually all of the existing App Store software, which has more than 150,000 applications. The Wi-Fi-only version of the hardware will go on sale in the U.S. on April 3.
Comments
If I remember correctly, the iPad's screen resolution is 1024x768 - which would make it a bit shy of the minimum requirement to display true HD content, right?
As a soon-to-be iPad owner, I can understand app developers using the 'XL' suffix to distinguish iPad versions of their applications from iPhone/iPod touch versions. However (and please correct me if I'm completely wrong here), isn't using the term 'HD' here just a bit misleading?
If I remember correctly, the iPad's screen resolution is 1024x768 - which would make it a bit shy of the minimum requirement to display true HD content, right?
Correct...
The iPad can support 720 lines of horizontal resolution (1024x768), but to be considered true 720p capable, the resolution needs to be at least 1280×720.
The result of going with such an archaic screen aspect ration of 4:3 rather than widescreen.
Oh Well...
.... isn't using the term 'HD' here just a bit misleading?
If I remember correctly .... right?
HD = Huge'ish Display ;-)
If I remember correctly, the iPad's screen resolution is 1024x768 - which would make it a bit shy of the minimum requirement to display true HD content, right?
768p is HD resolution. Standard Definition is 480.
HD=Higher Definition not High Definition?
It probably means "Humongous Display"!
As a soon-to-be iPad owner, I can understand app developers using the 'XL' suffix to distinguish iPad versions of their applications from iPhone/iPod touch versions. However (and please correct me if I'm completely wrong here), isn't using the term 'HD' here just a bit misleading?
If I remember correctly, the iPad's screen resolution is 1024x768 - which would make it a bit shy of the minimum requirement to display true HD content, right?
One might argue and point out that HD might stand for "Higher" definition, which in that case...
If I were a developer I would call mine "SS" for supersized
768p is HD resolution. Standard Definition is 480.
Actually...
768p is not really one of the recognized HD standards, and in order for a display to be considered true HD with a horizontal pixel count of 768, overall resolution would need to be at least 1366x768/16:9 widescreen.
Correct...
The iPad can support 720 lines of horizontal resolution (1024x768), but to be considered true 720p capable, the resolution needs to be at least 1280×720.
The result of going with such an archaic screen aspect ration of 4:3 rather than widescreen.
Oh Well...
The reason for the 4:3 is the device is primarily meant to be help in portrait. The main thing that suffers is movies.
Correct...
The iPad can support 720 lines of horizontal resolution (1024x768), but to be considered true 720p capable, the resolution needs to be at least 1280×720.
The result of going with such an archaic screen aspect ration of 4:3 rather than widescreen.
Oh Well...
A widescreen orientation was not proper for this type of device. In case you don't know, the iPad is not just for watching movies and video.
I am quite sure Apple gave this some considerable thought. For a lot of apps, the more standard ratio, at least at for that screen size, is more appropriate.
This will be exposed when all the "iPad killers" pop up.
The reason for the 4:3 is the device is primarily meant to be help in portrait. The main thing that suffers is movies.
I understand your position, but...
Given the iPad's pixel density, 2 pages could rather easily be read side-by-side with the device held horizontally, and not much would be compromised using a widescreen resolution of 1280×720 while still affording a much more pleasurable video/widescreen viewing experience i.e. no thick black bars at the top/bottom.
I guess it is what it is at this point.
In entertainment
A+ Records: Shake It! SP
A+ Records: Hotdog Eating Sp
Action Bricks SP
Action Bubble SP
Adrenaline Racer SP
Just a few pages search. I bet there have been many approved
Looks like along with HD and XP, SP is another extension being used
On the other hand, what if I was just casually browsing the top lists and saw a game that a friend had mentioned before, say "Plants vs Zombies" and without realizing there was an iPad-specific version, went ahead and bought the iPhone/iPod Touch version? And more importantly, if I already have that game/app on my iPhone, am I basically going to have to re-purchase it again just for use on the iPad? I'm sure arguments can be made both ways as far as developers needing to get paid for the extra time invested, but on the other hand, the two platforms share the same basic OS and therefore, most of the underlying code is already written.
It seemed to me during the unveiling of the iPad that Apple would allow for (perhaps even encourage?) developers to create a universal app that contained the necessary files and content for both devices in a single app. While arguably, this would make the apps larger in overall storage footprint, it would greatly alleviate confusion. Now I will have to double-check before I buy apps just to make sure there is no iPad version.
I hope Apple makes some kind of adjustment to the way apps are displayed in the store, maybe something akin to the SD/HD clicker selection option that they currently show for TV shows and movies. And hopefully they add some additional pricing control that could allow a user who has already purchased the iPhone/Touch version to get a discounted price on the iPad version.
So I worry a little that the "HD/XL" tags might easily be glossed over by casual users on the store. If I search for something specific, like "Plants vs Zombies" then I would expect to pull up both the iPhone AND iPad versions in the search results and then I can simply choose the appropriate one.
It seemed to me during the unveiling of the iPad that Apple would allow for (perhaps even encourage?) developers to create a universal app that contained the necessary files and content for both devices in a single app.
This would certainly be the most ideal solution, because as it stands this 'fracturing' of the Apps Store appears to create a situation nearly as confusing as that which the Android Market has been so liberally lambasted (in here).
HD = Huge'ish Display ;-)
Correct...
The iPad can support 720 lines of horizontal resolution (1024x768), but to be considered true 720p capable, the resolution needs to be at least 1280×720.
The result of going with such an archaic screen aspect ration of 4:3 rather than widescreen.
Oh Well...
4:3 is not archaic.
16:9 for the device as a whole would have been stupid. Movie viewing is only one of many functions of the device. Its like saying that because there's an astronomical sky-viewing application, that the whole device should be circular.
16:9 would have made the device clumsy and tweeked for one orientation over the other.