"Of course, high-end power users and "true" professionals also won't be able to rely on the iPad Pro as their primary computing device yet. Maybe one day there will be a version of Final Cut Pro or Xcode for iOS, but we're not there yet."
These kind of statements irritate the living heck out of me. "Pro" does not mean only artists and developers. "Pro's" are also teachers, coaches, doctors, nurses, lawyers, building inspectors, retails managers, real estate agents, etc.
This device, iOS, and customized apps (remember the IBM partnership) are PERFECT for those PROFESSIONALS, and any others who's job requires them to be mobile, who can make use of a powerful device that is ultra portable.
The complaint about a file system is silly. It's so widespread but it's just so backward looking. You wouldn't expect a file system if you weren't used to it; it's something we are used to from how computers have been organized, but in designing a system from the ground up it really doesn't add anything over the way that sharing files currently works on iOS.
100 percent disagree. I'm a photographer. I don't want to be forced into Apple's software "solutions." I don't want all my images in a hidden, corruptible database, accessed through software I don't use. I want fie system access for all the reasons file systems have been in use since when, the invention of paper?
You're thinking in terms of "social," which I imagine Apple handles reasonably well. As my life is not about Faceblob and Twit, "sharing" strikes me as a highly limited form of curation for idiots.
I bought a Pro. I like it, but within minutes I was imagining how much more useful the thing could be if it had file system access. Stuff like Dropbox is all well and good, except for all the frequent scenarios where web access is limited, or non existent.
Looking at the comments regarding camera and touch id I hate the fact that these were not the latest. Makes no sense for the most part other than could there be an argument that production of the new components could not meet yields for both iPhone s series and iPad Pro? Not sure. I always want the best but probably won't be using the camera for much and the touch id performance is not a deal breaker.
File system. I am just not convinced you need one. With iCloud, DropBox, OneDrive and others why do I need a file system? I have not heard an intelligent reason why you do yet so please respond if you have one.
Most users can replace laptops with this. There really is no excuse why you can't. I still would like to see touchpad or mouse support within certain apps like Excel.
Looking at the comments regarding camera and touch id I hate the fact that these were not the latest. Makes no sense for the most part other than could there be an argument that production of the new components could not meet yields for both iPhone s series and iPad Pro? Not sure. I always want the best but probably won't be using the camera for much and the touch id performance is not a deal breaker.
File system. I am just not convinced you need one. With iCloud, DropBox, OneDrive and others why do I need a file system? I have not heard an intelligent reason why you do yet so please respond if you have one.
Most users can replace laptops with this. There really is no excuse why you can't. I still would like to see touchpad or mouse support within certain apps like Excel.
Can't wait until mine arrives.
I thought iOS had a file system - it was just that the application typically only sees a sandboxed filesystem - so you would see your own Documents folder for that app where you are free to store things as files, create a database etc.
Apple apps like photos might chose to store the photos in a database, but that decision rests with each app developer.
I believe there is also the ability to share data between multiple apps through a few different controlled ways (depending on whether your apps are all from the same publisher).
Uh, no I'm not saying they are wrong. But we need to distinguish between levels of computing. From what you believe, anything less than a supercomputer, or a mainframe isn't a computer because it can't do what they do. That's nuts. When microcomputers first came out, people said they weren't computers because they couldn't do this or that. Those days are long gone, but now we get pc people saying that this isn't a computer because it can't do this or that. Come on, give me a break!
So I wouldn't do a complete professional movie, or Tv show edit on this. Or a complete photo edit. But then, I wouldn't do it on a Macbook Pro either. So I quess a Macbook Pro isn't a computer in your eyes because of that. After all, no Adobe RGB calibrated screen on either. You can't do pro level work without that.
But I would do the work on this that I would do on my Macbook Pro. Then, bring it to my Mac Pro. Just as I would do with my Macbook Pro.
So it's nice for you to be sarcastic, but I don't think you understand my point.
Why would an AI global moderator get to belittle someone for expressing an opinion like this? I'd expect this kinda thing from the usual trolls, but not from an AI representative.
I thought the review was informative, but my opinion is that the iPad Pro is not for me. I too prefer the MacBook Air for what I use it for. I don't see the iPad Pro as a replacement either, but I'm not a graphic artist or professional as described in the article. Does that make me full of myself?
That said, I guess I can demand a refund of my AI subscription.
Because that was trolling on his part. You might notice that a different mod, one who isn't as lenient as I am, deleted his post. Your post,,other than for the snark, is informative, his wasn't, it was all snark
Yes, we can give you a full refund for the free membership.
100 percent disagree. I'm a photographer. I don't want to be forced into Apple's software "solutions." I don't want all my images in a hidden, corruptible database, accessed through software I don't use. I want fie system access for all the reasons file systems have been in use since when, the invention of paper?
You're thinking in terms of "social," which I imagine Apple handles reasonably well. As my life is not about Faceblob and Twit, "sharing" strikes me as a highly limited form of curation for idiots.
I bought a Pro. I like it, but within minutes I was imagining how much more useful the thing could be if it had file system access. Stuff like Dropbox is all well and good, except for all the frequent scenarios where web access is limited, or non existent.
I understand the concern for the device storage. What if it becomes currupt, for example. That being said, everything is moving to the cloud. I can link you to articles in the professional computer journals, and you can see for yourself. It doesn't worry me, because, as usual, there are many solutions. Even on my Mac Pro, I don't keep my long term storage there. We shouldn't do that no matter what system we're using. So we do what most do, and use Box or Dropbox, Blu-Ray disks, etc. we can do this with the iPad as well. I use Adobe CC and my stuff goes to their cloud as well. It's what most of us are doing, and eventually everyone will be dragged into it, kicking and screaming as they go.
File systems were exposed, because in the primitive way of computing we did it many years ago, that's how it had to work. I don't suppose you want to go and crank your car before you start, or grease the chain. It's the same thing here.
I thought iOS had a file system - it was just that the application typically only sees a sandboxed filesystem - so you would see your own Documents folder for that app where you are free to store things as files, create a database etc.
Apple apps like photos might chose to store the photos in a database, but that decision rests with each app developer.
I believe there is also the ability to share data between multiple apps through a few different controlled ways (depending on whether your apps are all from the same publisher).
It does have a file system. It's just not as exposed as the ones on OS X and Windows are. Apple has been opening it up more, but it will never get where OS X and Windows are. And remember that with Win 8, Microsoft began to hide it as well. Of course, the entire OS was disliked so much they needed to take several steps back with Win 10.
It does have a file system. It's just not as exposed as the ones on OS X and Windows are. Apple has been opening it up more, but it will never get where OS X and Windows are. And remember that with Win 8, Microsoft began to hide it as well. Of course, the entire OS was disliked so much they needed to take several steps back with Win 10.
Opening up something in a controlled way is less likely to ruffle feathers, but removing something without having something as powerful to replace it is not as friendly.
There are ways to give the same functionality (generally speaking) without making it completely open. [Not saying this is a good idea - just a brainstorm] You could give finder functionality (from OS X) and an iOS version of finder that could give you a view of what directories (consolidation; symlinks) are open to have documents copied to -- or accessed for backup while only giving applications sandboxed access to it's own directory structure. You could allow users to install apps that grant permission to use another apps private directories. You could even give iOS a bash shell with utilities for developers - in the same restricted view of what is available to finder (as a developer - I find bash shell etc. indispensable). The file system on iOS is much more secure -- which is a good thing -- and eventually you can open it up in a controlled way while maintaining a more secure access. Security is a good thing. The problem I had was the claim that iOS did not have a file system....
Having wide open access to the entire file system from a user friendly touch environment likely would only likely adding more steps for users to browse around the whole file system storing documents, losing documents in wrong directories which would make it less efficient. I am sure that Apple is probably brainstorming and testing many different options which will try to maintain ease of use with security while allowing power users and developers more power.... As I am sure they are probably working with IBM on the ability to "mount" SAN/NAS/Enterprise Cloud drives additional storage ability. What we will likely see on the iPad Pro in 3 years will probably be similar to the changes we have seen from iPad 1, or early OS versions.... We will likely see OS X and iOS steal good ideas from each other but I suspect their will be more divergence going forward than convergence..... but these are all prognostications (and like all predictions if you even get 50% right you are a superstar ).
Opening up something in a controlled way is less likely to ruffle feathers, but removing something without having something as powerful to replace it is not as friendly.
There are ways to give the same functionality (generally speaking) without making it completely open. [Not saying this is a good idea - just a brainstorm] You could give finder functionality (from OS X) and an iOS version of finder that could give you a view of what directories (consolidation; symlinks) are open to have documents copied to -- or accessed for backup while only giving applications sandboxed access to it's own directory structure. You could allow users to install apps that grant permission to use another apps private directories. You could even give iOS a bash shell with utilities for developers - in the same restricted view of what is available to finder (as a developer - I find bash shell etc. indispensable). The file system on iOS is much more secure -- which is a good thing -- and eventually you can open it up in a controlled way while maintaining a more secure access. Security is a good thing. The problem I had was the claim that iOS did not have a file system....
Having wide open access to the entire file system from a user friendly touch environment likely would only likely adding more steps for users to browse around the whole file system storing documents, losing documents in wrong directories which would make it less efficient. I am sure that Apple is probably brainstorming and testing many different options which will try to maintain ease of use with security while allowing power users and developers more power.... As I am sure they are probably working with IBM on the ability to "mount" SAN/NAS/Enterprise Cloud drives additional storage ability. What we will likely see on the iPad Pro in 3 years will probably be similar to the changes we have seen from iPad 1, or early OS versions.... We will likely see OS X and iOS steal good ideas from each other but I suspect their will be more divergence going forward than convergence..... but these are all prognostications (and like all predictions if you even get 50% right you are a superstar ).
The trick here is to realize that they didn't remove it. iOS is different, and the file system was never exposed. Those of us who have been using it since 2008 are used to the way it is, and are pleased at the way Apple has been exposing it over time. Apple decided to keep iOS much more sandboxed than OS X because of security problems. That makes it difficult to fully expose the file system the way it is in OS X. They just, in iOS 9, came up with a system to safely allow files from one app to be accessed by another.
Apple moves slowly, and carefully. They believe that the turtle beats the hare, and while sometimes I'm frustrated by their slow pace, I understand why they do it that way.
I also see here, that some people misunderstand what I'm saying. To them, it's all or nothing. That's not the case. Computing is a continuum. Not every system needs what other systems need. And as I tell people, if you have some specialised needs that you can't (as yet) realize on this, then it's not for you. But there are many apps in the store that often can allow this to do much of what people say it can't, if only they would take the time to research it.
I hear more and more people talking about how greedy Apple has become lately. Frankly, I wouldn't bet against move on myself someone. I never would have said that 3 years ago. There's only so much shafting you can take before you get sense. Even myself I've begun to vocalise this with my non-hard core Apple friends. And they're not Android defenders or anything or the sort. Most of them use iPhones.
Has Apple gotten greedy? Or has the sense of entitlement grown completely out of whack?
They just, in iOS 9, came up with a system to safely allow files from one app to be accessed by another.
+1000000
There is literally nothing standing in the way now. It is now possible for ANY App to both Open Files From and Save Files To any App on the device. All that is required is Third Party Developer support.
The conversation should be about how lazy developers have become, and how the more APIs Apple gifts the community, the fewer get used by developers.
As I say all the time, and keep saying until I'm blue in the face, Apple needs to get heavy handed and start removing Apps from the store that don't comply with their Human Interface guidelines. All Apps in the Productivity category should be required to support the APIs delivered by Apple for this category, and so on.
There is literally nothing standing in the way now. It is now possible for ANY App to both Open Files From and Save Files To any App on the device. All that is required is Third Party Developer support.
The conversation should be about how lazy developers have become, and how the more APIs Apple gifts the community, the fewer get used by developers.
As I say all the time, and keep saying until I'm blue in the face, Apple needs to get heavy handed and start removing Apps from the store that don't comply with their Human Interface guidelines. All Apps in the Productivity category should be required to support the APIs delivered by Apple for this category, and so on.
When the Mac first came out, pc people were saying that it wasn't a "real" computer, just a toy, because we couldn't screw up the Mac by editing the System Configuration files. I can't remember how many times I used to have to fix a pc because because some shmo forgot a comma, or space somewhere, from the change he copied from Creative Computing, or some such crap.
Now we get the same thing here. Oh, this isn't a REAL computer, because I can't screw up the file system. Oh boo.
When the Mac first came out, pc people were saying that it wasn't a "real" computer, just a toy, because we couldn't screw up the Mac by editing the System Configuration files. I can't remember how many times I used to have to fix a pc because because some shmo forgot a comma, or space somewhere, from the change he copied from Creative Computing, or some such crap.
Now we get the same thing here. Oh, this isn't a REAL computer, because I can't screw up the file system. Oh boo.
And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. I use every imaginable cloud service available, and I still end up with files on my Desktop, or in my Downloads folder, or randomly saved to my Home directory, that aren't with me when I'm on iOS.
With the iOS approach, Files are always saved with a particular App, and the App either syncs withs own servers or iCloud. In an iOS world, I am never without any of my files...and I don't even need enough local storage to keep them all.
And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. I use every imaginable cloud service available, and I still end up with files on my Desktop, or in my Downloads folder, or randomly saved to my Home directory, that aren't with me when I'm on iOS.
With the iOS approach, Files are always saved with a particular App, and the App either syncs withs own servers or iCloud. In an iOS world, I am never without any of my files...and I don't even need enough local storage to keep them all.
"And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. "
I wonder if the iPad Pro and Pencil would work in zero gravity. I guess display orientation might be tricky, but Apple could easily allow a SW setting to have the orientation switch at will, perhaps even making the Toggle switch on the side switch from landscape to portrait.
There's an article out today saying apps for the Pro may be slow in coming due to Apple's App Store policies. Valid concern? Developers here, and I know there are a few, can probably offer comment.
"One of the common complaints made by software developers who spoke to The Verge is that they can’t offer free trials of their apps as part of the App Store download process, or issue paid upgrades to long-term users."
Neither of those things are true. You can offer a free trial by making your app free to download, and making the full version be an in-app purchase. And you can offer paid upgrades by release major new versions as separate apps, e.g. Photoshop 1.0 is one app on the App Store, Photoshop 2.0 is a separate app. This also allows for the release of bugfixes for past versions without giving people new features for free.
"Others say that selling apps through the App Store can create a kind of wall between them and their customers if the customers have issues with their software."
Well each app on the App Store has a support link that links back to the developer's website. What they are really complaining about is that when you buy an app, Apple just gives them the money, it doesn't give them your personal contact details. And they want to put your details in a big database so they can spam you evermore trying to get more money out of you. To which I say, "Thanks Apple."
But the point about upgrade pricing is valid. And it would be nice if companies could integrate user support forums in to the App Store somehow. And the point about prices being low in general on the App Store is valid, it's kind of like the web in that way. The web conditioned everyone to expect everything for free, and the App Store conditioned everyone to expect everything for $0.99.
The Mac App Store does not suffer from this problem I note, with pro apps on there going for hundreds of dollars. So Macs and PCs are still a better place to sell pro software, but I don't think the iOS barriers are as bad as they are making out.
There's an article out today saying apps for the Pro may be slow in coming due to Apple's App Store policies. Valid concern? Developers here, and I know there are a few, can probably offer comment.
I think the bulk of the concern about apps and app pricing etc. is more about people in this day and age having an over inflated sense of entitlement. There are apps that are written for iOS that target an audience that people are willing to pay good money for and are successful. If you are competing in a market where all the apps are 99c (which in many cases are quick and dirty games - which are worth what you pay for them), then you are hard pressed to make money..... unless you distinguish yourself. If you write an app that fills a professional need like many of the Omni apps, pcal etc. then people are willing to buy those apps and use them. Developers that write an app then throw in on the store then expect money to roll in are just a bunch of entitled idiots. Writing good software is only part that people want is only half the job. The store is a store, nothing more. It is up to the developer to setup a webpage, do his own marketing, try to get it in the hands of people that will review it etc. You are an independent developer, and it is not up to Apple to market your app... nothing really new with that one.
There are two things that would be nice for the App store to handle:
1. Upgrade pricing directly... Though there are ways around this by using an existing app and doing something like inapp purchasing -- which I have seen though have not used.
2. The ability to allow software to install and run for a time based period with a certificate expiry date set by the developer (i.e. trial period). This will not help though if the people trying to sell the software are not actually marketing their own software - no one else will do that for you.
Comments
Do you think $1000 is lot for a device, in that context?
It might be a bit out of their budget, I guess it depends on whether it replaces any existing things in the budget.
These kind of statements irritate the living heck out of me. "Pro" does not mean only artists and developers. "Pro's" are also teachers, coaches, doctors, nurses, lawyers, building inspectors, retails managers, real estate agents, etc.
This device, iOS, and customized apps (remember the IBM partnership) are PERFECT for those PROFESSIONALS, and any others who's job requires them to be mobile, who can make use of a powerful device that is ultra portable.
The complaint about a file system is silly. It's so widespread but it's just so backward looking. You wouldn't expect a file system if you weren't used to it; it's something we are used to from how computers have been organized, but in designing a system from the ground up it really doesn't add anything over the way that sharing files currently works on iOS.
100 percent disagree. I'm a photographer. I don't want to be forced into Apple's software "solutions." I don't want all my images in a hidden, corruptible database, accessed through software I don't use. I want fie system access for all the reasons file systems have been in use since when, the invention of paper?
You're thinking in terms of "social," which I imagine Apple handles reasonably well. As my life is not about Faceblob and Twit, "sharing" strikes me as a highly limited form of curation for idiots.
I bought a Pro. I like it, but within minutes I was imagining how much more useful the thing could be if it had file system access. Stuff like Dropbox is all well and good, except for all the frequent scenarios where web access is limited, or non existent.
File system. I am just not convinced you need one. With iCloud, DropBox, OneDrive and others why do I need a file system? I have not heard an intelligent reason why you do yet so please respond if you have one.
Most users can replace laptops with this. There really is no excuse why you can't. I still would like to see touchpad or mouse support within certain apps like Excel.
Can't wait until mine arrives.
Looking at the comments regarding camera and touch id I hate the fact that these were not the latest. Makes no sense for the most part other than could there be an argument that production of the new components could not meet yields for both iPhone s series and iPad Pro? Not sure. I always want the best but probably won't be using the camera for much and the touch id performance is not a deal breaker.
File system. I am just not convinced you need one. With iCloud, DropBox, OneDrive and others why do I need a file system? I have not heard an intelligent reason why you do yet so please respond if you have one.
Most users can replace laptops with this. There really is no excuse why you can't. I still would like to see touchpad or mouse support within certain apps like Excel.
Can't wait until mine arrives.
I thought iOS had a file system - it was just that the application typically only sees a sandboxed filesystem - so you would see your own Documents folder for that app where you are free to store things as files, create a database etc.
Apple apps like photos might chose to store the photos in a database, but that decision rests with each app developer.
I believe there is also the ability to share data between multiple apps through a few different controlled ways (depending on whether your apps are all from the same publisher).
Uh, no I'm not saying they are wrong. But we need to distinguish between levels of computing. From what you believe, anything less than a supercomputer, or a mainframe isn't a computer because it can't do what they do. That's nuts. When microcomputers first came out, people said they weren't computers because they couldn't do this or that. Those days are long gone, but now we get pc people saying that this isn't a computer because it can't do this or that. Come on, give me a break!
So I wouldn't do a complete professional movie, or Tv show edit on this. Or a complete photo edit. But then, I wouldn't do it on a Macbook Pro either. So I quess a Macbook Pro isn't a computer in your eyes because of that. After all, no Adobe RGB calibrated screen on either. You can't do pro level work without that.
But I would do the work on this that I would do on my Macbook Pro. Then, bring it to my Mac Pro. Just as I would do with my Macbook Pro.
So it's nice for you to be sarcastic, but I don't think you understand my point.
Because that was trolling on his part. You might notice that a different mod, one who isn't as lenient as I am, deleted his post. Your post,,other than for the snark, is informative, his wasn't, it was all snark
Yes, we can give you a full refund for the free membership.
I understand the concern for the device storage. What if it becomes currupt, for example. That being said, everything is moving to the cloud. I can link you to articles in the professional computer journals, and you can see for yourself. It doesn't worry me, because, as usual, there are many solutions. Even on my Mac Pro, I don't keep my long term storage there. We shouldn't do that no matter what system we're using. So we do what most do, and use Box or Dropbox, Blu-Ray disks, etc. we can do this with the iPad as well. I use Adobe CC and my stuff goes to their cloud as well. It's what most of us are doing, and eventually everyone will be dragged into it, kicking and screaming as they go.
File systems were exposed, because in the primitive way of computing we did it many years ago, that's how it had to work. I don't suppose you want to go and crank your car before you start, or grease the chain. It's the same thing here.
It does have a file system. It's just not as exposed as the ones on OS X and Windows are. Apple has been opening it up more, but it will never get where OS X and Windows are. And remember that with Win 8, Microsoft began to hide it as well. Of course, the entire OS was disliked so much they needed to take several steps back with Win 10.
It does have a file system. It's just not as exposed as the ones on OS X and Windows are. Apple has been opening it up more, but it will never get where OS X and Windows are. And remember that with Win 8, Microsoft began to hide it as well. Of course, the entire OS was disliked so much they needed to take several steps back with Win 10.
Opening up something in a controlled way is less likely to ruffle feathers, but removing something without having something as powerful to replace it is not as friendly.
There are ways to give the same functionality (generally speaking) without making it completely open. [Not saying this is a good idea - just a brainstorm] You could give finder functionality (from OS X) and an iOS version of finder that could give you a view of what directories (consolidation; symlinks) are open to have documents copied to -- or accessed for backup while only giving applications sandboxed access to it's own directory structure. You could allow users to install apps that grant permission to use another apps private directories. You could even give iOS a bash shell with utilities for developers - in the same restricted view of what is available to finder (as a developer - I find bash shell etc. indispensable). The file system on iOS is much more secure -- which is a good thing -- and eventually you can open it up in a controlled way while maintaining a more secure access. Security is a good thing. The problem I had was the claim that iOS did not have a file system....
Having wide open access to the entire file system from a user friendly touch environment likely would only likely adding more steps for users to browse around the whole file system storing documents, losing documents in wrong directories which would make it less efficient. I am sure that Apple is probably brainstorming and testing many different options which will try to maintain ease of use with security while allowing power users and developers more power.... As I am sure they are probably working with IBM on the ability to "mount" SAN/NAS/Enterprise Cloud drives additional storage ability. What we will likely see on the iPad Pro in 3 years will probably be similar to the changes we have seen from iPad 1, or early OS versions.... We will likely see OS X and iOS steal good ideas from each other but I suspect their will be more divergence going forward than convergence..... but these are all prognostications (and like all predictions if you even get 50% right you are a superstar
).
The trick here is to realize that they didn't remove it. iOS is different, and the file system was never exposed. Those of us who have been using it since 2008 are used to the way it is, and are pleased at the way Apple has been exposing it over time. Apple decided to keep iOS much more sandboxed than OS X because of security problems. That makes it difficult to fully expose the file system the way it is in OS X. They just, in iOS 9, came up with a system to safely allow files from one app to be accessed by another.
Apple moves slowly, and carefully. They believe that the turtle beats the hare, and while sometimes I'm frustrated by their slow pace, I understand why they do it that way.
I also see here, that some people misunderstand what I'm saying. To them, it's all or nothing. That's not the case. Computing is a continuum. Not every system needs what other systems need. And as I tell people, if you have some specialised needs that you can't (as yet) realize on this, then it's not for you. But there are many apps in the store that often can allow this to do much of what people say it can't, if only they would take the time to research it.
I hear more and more people talking about how greedy Apple has become lately. Frankly, I wouldn't bet against move on myself someone. I never would have said that 3 years ago. There's only so much shafting you can take before you get sense. Even myself I've begun to vocalise this with my non-hard core Apple friends. And they're not Android defenders or anything or the sort. Most of them use iPhones.
Has Apple gotten greedy? Or has the sense of entitlement grown completely out of whack?
They just, in iOS 9, came up with a system to safely allow files from one app to be accessed by another.
+1000000
There is literally nothing standing in the way now. It is now possible for ANY App to both Open Files From and Save Files To any App on the device. All that is required is Third Party Developer support.
The conversation should be about how lazy developers have become, and how the more APIs Apple gifts the community, the fewer get used by developers.
As I say all the time, and keep saying until I'm blue in the face, Apple needs to get heavy handed and start removing Apps from the store that don't comply with their Human Interface guidelines. All Apps in the Productivity category should be required to support the APIs delivered by Apple for this category, and so on.
When the Mac first came out, pc people were saying that it wasn't a "real" computer, just a toy, because we couldn't screw up the Mac by editing the System Configuration files. I can't remember how many times I used to have to fix a pc because because some shmo forgot a comma, or space somewhere, from the change he copied from Creative Computing, or some such crap.
Now we get the same thing here. Oh, this isn't a REAL computer, because I can't screw up the file system. Oh boo.
When the Mac first came out, pc people were saying that it wasn't a "real" computer, just a toy, because we couldn't screw up the Mac by editing the System Configuration files. I can't remember how many times I used to have to fix a pc because because some shmo forgot a comma, or space somewhere, from the change he copied from Creative Computing, or some such crap.
Now we get the same thing here. Oh, this isn't a REAL computer, because I can't screw up the file system. Oh boo.
And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. I use every imaginable cloud service available, and I still end up with files on my Desktop, or in my Downloads folder, or randomly saved to my Home directory, that aren't with me when I'm on iOS.
With the iOS approach, Files are always saved with a particular App, and the App either syncs withs own servers or iCloud. In an iOS world, I am never without any of my files...and I don't even need enough local storage to keep them all.
And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. I use every imaginable cloud service available, and I still end up with files on my Desktop, or in my Downloads folder, or randomly saved to my Home directory, that aren't with me when I'm on iOS.
With the iOS approach, Files are always saved with a particular App, and the App either syncs withs own servers or iCloud. In an iOS world, I am never without any of my files...and I don't even need enough local storage to keep them all.
"And because of the whiners, we can't even take a moment to appreciate how much better iOS is than the traditional computer. "
You can if you filter out whiners.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/19/9757516/ipad-pro-apps-pricing-ios-developers-opt-out
There's an article out today saying apps for the Pro may be slow in coming due to Apple's App Store policies. Valid concern? Developers here, and I know there are a few, can probably offer comment.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/19/9757516/ipad-pro-apps-pricing-ios-developers-opt-out
"One of the common complaints made by software developers who spoke to The Verge is that they can’t offer free trials of their apps as part of the App Store download process, or issue paid upgrades to long-term users."
Neither of those things are true. You can offer a free trial by making your app free to download, and making the full version be an in-app purchase. And you can offer paid upgrades by release major new versions as separate apps, e.g. Photoshop 1.0 is one app on the App Store, Photoshop 2.0 is a separate app. This also allows for the release of bugfixes for past versions without giving people new features for free.
"Others say that selling apps through the App Store can create a kind of wall between them and their customers if the customers have issues with their software."
Well each app on the App Store has a support link that links back to the developer's website. What they are really complaining about is that when you buy an app, Apple just gives them the money, it doesn't give them your personal contact details. And they want to put your details in a big database so they can spam you evermore trying to get more money out of you. To which I say, "Thanks Apple."
But the point about upgrade pricing is valid. And it would be nice if companies could integrate user support forums in to the App Store somehow. And the point about prices being low in general on the App Store is valid, it's kind of like the web in that way. The web conditioned everyone to expect everything for free, and the App Store conditioned everyone to expect everything for $0.99.
The Mac App Store does not suffer from this problem I note, with pro apps on there going for hundreds of dollars. So Macs and PCs are still a better place to sell pro software, but I don't think the iOS barriers are as bad as they are making out.
There's an article out today saying apps for the Pro may be slow in coming due to Apple's App Store policies. Valid concern? Developers here, and I know there are a few, can probably offer comment.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/19/9757516/ipad-pro-apps-pricing-ios-developers-opt-out
I think the bulk of the concern about apps and app pricing etc. is more about people in this day and age having an over inflated sense of entitlement. There are apps that are written for iOS that target an audience that people are willing to pay good money for and are successful. If you are competing in a market where all the apps are 99c (which in many cases are quick and dirty games - which are worth what you pay for them), then you are hard pressed to make money..... unless you distinguish yourself. If you write an app that fills a professional need like many of the Omni apps, pcal etc. then people are willing to buy those apps and use them. Developers that write an app then throw in on the store then expect money to roll in are just a bunch of entitled idiots. Writing good software is only part that people want is only half the job. The store is a store, nothing more. It is up to the developer to setup a webpage, do his own marketing, try to get it in the hands of people that will review it etc. You are an independent developer, and it is not up to Apple to market your app... nothing really new with that one.
There are two things that would be nice for the App store to handle:
1. Upgrade pricing directly... Though there are ways around this by using an existing app and doing something like inapp purchasing -- which I have seen though have not used.
2. The ability to allow software to install and run for a time based period with a certificate expiry date set by the developer (i.e. trial period). This will not help though if the people trying to sell the software are not actually marketing their own software - no one else will do that for you.