I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
Tell you what. Sign up as a developer, download the SDK build, run and test your app in the devkit using the simulator. Then submit it to the store. No ipad required.
Tell you what. Sign up as a developer, download the SDK build, run and test your app in the devkit using the simulator. Then submit it to the store. No ipad required.
I'm not a developer nor do I plan to be.
Before the App Store opened, any developer could test their iPhone apps on an iPhone. Sure, it wasn't the iPhone 3G but it was hardware that gave them a good idea of how their app would feel.
Obviously Apple can't send every developer an iPad or even do one of those tours where they go around the country letting developers try out the iPad. Totally understandable.
An alternative would be to delay iPad app approvals a week or so. This would limit the selection of day one apps to those that ship on the iPad but it would also mean the apps released?at least some of them?would be tested in more than just the simulator.
This likely won't be an issue a month after launch but in the first few weeks, it could taint users' opinions of iPad apps. Hopefully Apple's app reviewers will test these apps on the iPad.
Fortunately, third party apps aren't as important for the iPad as they are on the iPhone/iPod touch because many of the most popular iPhone apps are those that optimize web content for its small 3.5" screen. The iPad's much larger 9.7" screen means those apps aren't as necessary anymore because you can browse the Web without constant zooming in/panning/zooming out.
I predict the big system seller for the iPad will be its web browser. It was for me.
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
I guess Apple prefers to have as many apps as possible on launch day, even if some have 'minor issues'.
Devs can always sumbit updates/bug fixes after launch, and the revision process is quite faster for updates than for initial review (they just check you didn't covertly add any boobies )
Between tekstud blatantly flaunting his ban and marvin the moderator spreading FUD about the iPad (the iPad has mobile phone level hardware and therefore won't be useful for artists looking for serious sketching/designing/layout/painting here) I'm starting to wonder what is up with this forum and what the heck the real admins are thinking.
Sounds like they want things to be just perfect for launch day, I can't wait.
Or they just want the store stocked for launch day to encourage iPad sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
Good to hear, sounds like they're committed to approving hundreds of apps by April 3rd, given the timeline and promise of secondary feedback / final launch submissions.
May not have to run many of those iPhone apps afterall
I wouldn't be surprised to see thousands of iPads-optimized apps by launch day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
but keep in mind that there's the best Flash to iphone convertor, which would at least get someone started on an iphone/ipad app. if it works as promised.
Absolutely!
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
That wouldn't be good for business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
Will there be fart and flashlight apps available?
They already exist. Scaling a flashlight app for the iPhone/Touch should work the same and come in handy for some, though less often than the pocketable device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
It will be a problem to release for a device without having the hardware. The simulator is not enough for a public release.
Hopefully the reviewers are using iPads to test the apps.
Comments
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
Flash developers need not apply.
Don't stop with Flash... lets be honest...
Ada, APL, Applescript, AsmL, Assembly, Basic, BETA, C, C#, C++, Caml, CAT, CFML, Clarion, Cobol, Cobra, CULE, Eiffel, Flash, Forth, Fortran, Haskell, Hypercard, Java, Lexico, LISP, LOGO, Lua, Mercury, Modrian, Modula-2, Nemerle, Oberon, Pan, Pascal, Perl, PHP, Prolog, Python, RPG, Ruby, Scala, Scheme, Smalltalk, SML, Spry, Synergy, Tcl/Tk...
Need I go on?
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
Tell you what. Sign up as a developer, download the SDK build, run and test your app in the devkit using the simulator. Then submit it to the store. No ipad required.
Flash developers need not apply.
Christ, are you still here?!?
Tell you what. Sign up as a developer, download the SDK build, run and test your app in the devkit using the simulator. Then submit it to the store. No ipad required.
I'm not a developer nor do I plan to be.
Before the App Store opened, any developer could test their iPhone apps on an iPhone. Sure, it wasn't the iPhone 3G but it was hardware that gave them a good idea of how their app would feel.
Obviously Apple can't send every developer an iPad or even do one of those tours where they go around the country letting developers try out the iPad. Totally understandable.
An alternative would be to delay iPad app approvals a week or so. This would limit the selection of day one apps to those that ship on the iPad but it would also mean the apps released?at least some of them?would be tested in more than just the simulator.
This likely won't be an issue a month after launch but in the first few weeks, it could taint users' opinions of iPad apps. Hopefully Apple's app reviewers will test these apps on the iPad.
Fortunately, third party apps aren't as important for the iPad as they are on the iPhone/iPod touch because many of the most popular iPhone apps are those that optimize web content for its small 3.5" screen. The iPad's much larger 9.7" screen means those apps aren't as necessary anymore because you can browse the Web without constant zooming in/panning/zooming out.
I predict the big system seller for the iPad will be its web browser. It was for me.
And what are you then?
I can be negative like the next person, but I can also be positive, unlike is possible for you.
Will there be fart and flashlight apps available?
Why?.
Flash Gordon need not apply.
At least he still has Dale Arden. Rrrrow.
Techstud is a negative person.
'Techstud' is an oxymoron
Flash Gordon need not apply.
Don't you mean Flesh Gorden?
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
I expect the apps submitted by the select group of developers given iPads to be good but I don't know about the rest. It's exciting both for us users and developers nonetheless.
I guess Apple prefers to have as many apps as possible on launch day, even if some have 'minor issues'.
Devs can always sumbit updates/bug fixes after launch, and the revision process is quite faster for updates than for initial review (they just check you didn't covertly add any boobies
Techstud is a negative person.
more like the mods/site admins are disssapointing...
I finally got around to watching the iPad intro video. Apparently, the App Store will have a separate iPad App section.
I'm glad I made my iPad pre-order!
Techstud is a negative person.
Of that we can be sure.
Christ, are you still here?!?
Between tekstud blatantly flaunting his ban and marvin the moderator spreading FUD about the iPad (the iPad has mobile phone level hardware and therefore won't be useful for artists looking for serious sketching/designing/layout/painting here) I'm starting to wonder what is up with this forum and what the heck the real admins are thinking.
Sounds like they want things to be just perfect for launch day, I can't wait.
Or they just want the store stocked for launch day to encourage iPad sales.
Good to hear, sounds like they're committed to approving hundreds of apps by April 3rd, given the timeline and promise of secondary feedback / final launch submissions.
May not have to run many of those iPhone apps afterall
I wouldn't be surprised to see thousands of iPads-optimized apps by launch day.
but keep in mind that there's the best Flash to iphone convertor, which would at least get someone started on an iphone/ipad app. if it works as promised.
Absolutely!
I'd actually prefer Apple delay iPad app approvals for a week or two post-launch. That would at least give developers a chance to test on real world hardware.
That wouldn't be good for business.
Will there be fart and flashlight apps available?
They already exist. Scaling a flashlight app for the iPhone/Touch should work the same and come in handy for some, though less often than the pocketable device.
It will be a problem to release for a device without having the hardware. The simulator is not enough for a public release.
Hopefully the reviewers are using iPads to test the apps.
And what are you then?
No, no, no. He is not negative! He is not even real. Imaginary he is. But I suspect he wants to masquerade as complex.
And what are you then?
At the very least... minimally observant.