Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Comments
No it isn't, or licence transfers would not exist
Trust me. It is. Ownership always lies with the creator of the software. "License transfer" simply means that you're giving up your license to use the software and transferring this license to someone else. Whether this is possible is not a legal matter, but a business decision by the licensor (i.e. the legal owner of the software or the publisher, depending on the contract).
The only way you could e.g. own Ripplemaker is by offering me a large sum of money and me handing you the source code and the right to use it as you see fit.
So you rent it to us then ?
Again word play, i am not saying you are wrong, but you seem to be saying the courts in the EU are wrong and "Purchased" software is entirely at the discretion of its creator, which it is not.
You know as well as me the case i am talking of, and you also know that IOS app "buyers" have less rights than other software "buyers" when it comes to refunds or selling on, or (and this is the cruncher) expecting a usable servicable software, yes thats right, on desktop software that is "sold" the purchaser has the right to expect a fully working as advertised software within reasonable time frame or they have the right to ask for the source and if it is not provided, the right to decompile and fix for personal use.
Ok that sounds more extreme than it actually is because you would lose those rights if not using the exact supported piece of hardware with the exact supported OS revision and so on, and yes this is more relevant to industrial software, but my point still stands and is a point of law.
Trust me, i am not advocating it, i am unsure where it will lead and already we saw companies react by switching to subscription where the law no longer applies, but we also saw a bunch of independent developers become big successes off its back too because of their open policy.
I wont go over it more for fear of completely derailling the thread, anybody can easily google it and find the case law.
Yes, in a way. Actually, I rent it to Apple, who can give you a license for use on my behalf. All you get when you pay for software is a contract, signed by the licensee (you) and the licensor (the publisher, Apple) which lists the rules and obligations you both have to adhere to (that's the other 99 pages you scrolled through to find the "I Agree" button
).
Being able to transfer a license is not automatically a legal right, since the new buyer never actually signed a contract with Apple (in this case) about the use of the software. Just like you can't transfer a drivers license you can't just transfer a software use license unless the contract explicitly states you can.
For iOS software this is really crucial (to bring it back on topic) since more than a few apps, such as games and little handy tools have a usefulness/entertainment-lifetime of only one or a few days. Being able to refund or resell the app after that short time could have catastrophic effects for entire product categories.
But besides, there have been plenty of times when I left a movie theatre disappointed (thinking the cinema should have paid me for my lost time), but never once have I considered seeking a legal basis for getting a refund for movie tickets on the basis of "it wasn't good enough for me". Although it wouldn't even surprise me if some people actually did that.
Yeah like i said it is barely relevant, but it is the law on "buying" software vs "buying a right to use under condition" so i thought it would be relevant to post it.
I agree about the lifespan of most IOS software, I have found the same with most IOS music software too, there are obvious gems like your makers (although i barely use Phasemaker anymore to be fair) and have to say if there was a generous demo for most of it, most of those developers would be gone because they couldnt sustain their micro costed business.
This is a great idea. There's a lot of stuff I purchased that I use a few times and never use again. Especially the more expensive apps (= above $10.00) I would like to offer for sale. I think there would be a huge market for reselling stuff, look at the Platstation and XBox game market.
if all developers just did demos then all the legal/rights stuff would be irrelevant. cubasis and gadget do a LE version. DRC and synthmaster do too. if it's possible to get a refund and still keep the app on your device then i'm not surprised that apple would want to get arsey
As far as I'm aware you can only get a refund if you can prove there is an issue with the app in question. Which means you can't use it properly. As you don't have access to updates after a refund, any fixes won't apply so you still have an app that doesn't work. And the avalanche of iOS updates will mean that over time it'll work even less.
Unless people are getting refunds for apps that are working perfectly (a bad thing), then it shouldn't be an issue.
>
I’ve encountered that, too. AFAIK it’s bollocks. In the UK and EU distance selling is the law. If you simply change your mind, providing you do it quickly enough, they have to give you your money back.
I try to research most apps I buy, so have only ever asked for a refund when something flat out doesn’t do what it claims, and the fault is not just a bug.
So far, I have never had a problem getting my refund. As a result, I keep buying apps, confident that if I’m sold a pup - which is rarely - I’m not stuck with it.
It's all licensed including the hardware.
@MonzoPro if you can't return an app that works then well that would rule out the option of 'i got these shoes but they don't fit my feet!' maybe the blacklist comes from apple being able to check if a person has deleted it first. who knows. i want a refund on an app-the first that i've decided not to go 'oh, well' with. so i'll see
i haven't bought that much stuff, probably around 12 apps and i use 4. some i realised within a hour i would never use but chose not to ask for a refund out of kinda self embarrassment. but now i'm of the view that if they don't give out demos, then expect the possibility of having to refunding people.
I don’t know if there is an actual blacklist, certainly that would conflict with current EU returns policies, and the pop-up/acknowledgment they give is meaningless here. You can put what you like in your T&C’s but if it doesn’t match the law then it’s not worth the pop up it’s coded on.
I think though, the try, buy and return approach is a bad thing, and muddies the waters for those trying to get refunds for stuff that doesn’t work. Like Zen, I do everything I possibly can to find out if the app does what I want/expect it to, and only return stuff that’s broken.
When I try to request a refund, I just get “This App is not eligible for a refund.” Wasted $40. Ouch.
I think there should at least be a built-in 30 minute trial for ALL apps. At least you could determine if it’s even in the ball park of what you want from it.
This just affects automatic refund, if you are on that list and contact apple with your reason for wanting a refund within the 90 days, they will review your case and either grant or deny the refund request.
There is 14 day refund period in appstore in my country .. this is not about apple but about law in given country. In our cutry EVERY online purchase in EVERY shop have 14 day refund period. If it is not like this in you coutry, you should push you policians for such law
This refund is great thing, i returned for example BM3 or Fruity Studio Mobile
))
But Apple have pretty broken implementation of this refund funcinality. Even if you "return" app and receive refund, you still can use app on you device until you manually don't delete it.
You do not receive any future updates but app works.. i think this is unfair to developers, i know one guy who is simply returning ALL apps immediately after buying .. if he wants update, he simply deletes app, buy it again and return again ..
I got a refund for Cubasis 2 by e-mailing apple. It was confusing and when they issued the refund the app was still there fully functional. Eventually I just deleted the app.
I have requested 6 or 7 refunds, and have never had a problem with the exception of Tanbur HD. The developer is a non-responsive goddamn grifter.
Well it won’t even let me submit a request. Says not eligible. Must be a USA thing?
When I contacted apple about a refund on x drummer they tried to get me to work out it with the developer and they're was never an option to discuss that the app is nowhere near what the marketing makes it seem. So I just decided the $10 was my last reminder (I guess I needed a few) to ignore anything in the future from said developer. Luckily it was $10.
That being said, there are apps that have trial periods, and I think it would be good to have that. An IAP that removed intermittent noise or something like that would be cool.
That being said, after buying vacuum pro and hybrid 3 for almost nothing in Christmas sales, then dealing with crazy install and licensing requirements made me appreciate the ease of the app store. So I guess there's advantages and disadvantages to any way that's thought up.
Correct. It is a transparent attempt to bully customers with false information contrary to our rights in law. Any business with an apparent worth of 1.4 trillion dollars should not feel the need to behave like this.
>
Yes, this is right and proper. Try before you buy can be catered for with working demos, perhaps time limited so people who are genuinely unsure of an expensive product can give it a serious go.
Occasionally an app will not work with another app, such as an AU incompatibility, but any dev worth his salt will try to issue a fix ASAP. So, while frustrating, this is par for the course, and sometimes we have to wait.
I only ever ask for a refund if something is not fit for purpose, nor likely to be.
>
Could be. If the USA does not have the equivalent of distance selling regulations, then you may be screwed.