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.
Using NFT's for buying/reselling auv3's....
So I've been known to have a rant or two on this forum about the fundamental worthlessness of spending money on software when compared to hardware. The price of ipad apps is basically the max I'll go, on desktop I just won't spend 300 bucks on a softsynth or effect. I can buy a decent used Olds trumpet for 20 or 30 bucks and it will last and be usable if I take care of it for 100 years and I can sell it in 100 years. Now if I spend that same money on a SWAM trumpet pack I'm basically just buying a limited time share of access to the app. Think of the original Animoog app. I mean sure it's still 'accessible' for those who already purchased it, but there's no way there gonna keep that there forever. And think about all the old InterAppAudio apps that are being phased out with any updates to auv3, or apps that simply won't be updated for compatibility with a new OS update. And that goes with any piece of software. I was reading up on Gamestop and how they plan to use NFT's to enable the buying and selling of used digital video games, and that seems to be an obvious solution to my problem with spending money on musical software programs. Would be really cool for Apple to implement something like this in their store. It's either that or hoping that when these apps become abandonware there is a vimm's castle style equivalent to ipad apps that let me download all the old games and play ps1 and SNES games on my android phone.
Comments
Interesting thought. Apple aren't likely to do that because there's no financial motivation for them that I can think of. If one could come up with such a motivation and it was strong enough there could be a possibility I suppose.
However, if the App Store monopoly is ever broken up in a meaningful way, an alternative blockchain based way of buying and selling apps would absolutely be doable and could be infinitely flexible, scalable, distributed, etc. etc. etc. It would be fabulous. Virtually any kind of ownership model could be implemented through smart contracts too.
NFTs as they exist now wouldn't be helpful for this, but other blockchain technologies definitely could.
I'd be interested to hear why you think the App Store is a monopoly.
I'd be interested to hear how you think you can install apps on an iOS device other than through the App Store?
I did not mean the word monopoly in any broader context than within the iOS ecosystem.
You can use other apps on iOS right now. Web apps. If a person wants a completely open system (but to be accurate, it's not really "completely open") there is one less capable and more vulnerable to viruses and security breaches: Android.
Apple developed the software and tools and the hardware for their system. They are under zero obligation to allow unverified apps onto iOS.
What precisely do you need that you're not getting through the App Store anyway? This is not to besmirch you or anything, but the only people I've ever heard say they need to install rogue apps want to do so because they want to download pirated software.
Isn't part of NFT that the author can get a percentage of the value each time the item is sold? Then perhaps both Apple and the developer could get it, and it would be a win-win concept (well except not if it takes away sales of new app licenses).
To make it fair, perhaps one should build some "bit rot" into it, introducing small glitches and bugs each time the piece is sold, to model the wear and tear
Awesome, I'd love to see a list of web music apps that you can use on iOS. I'm totally ready to ditch my collection in favor of an online experience - I just haven't stumbled across the links. Thanks in advance for the help!
@NeuM - I'm not gonna get into a semantics, security, political, or any other kind of argument with ya. Sorry, just not in the mood. I'm intrigued with the potential of blockchain technology to solve real-world problems. That was my only reason for making that comment.
Web music apps?
https://www.soundtrap.com
Not that I've ever heard. But "NFT" is a general term, like the word "sale" or "contract". It can mean just about anything.
Like distressed Levi blue jeans? Oh hell yeh. That'd be awesome (and doable).
Awesome. Reformatting device now. Thank god I don't have to deal with any of these shitty little iOS toys any more. You have changed my life bud! Thanks!
Cool! They’ve even got an app on the AppStore for it…
Apple stops web apps from working well by blocking JIT in the browser (and everywhere else).
Much if not most of iOS and macOS is based on open source software. All of the compilers for macOS to iOS are open source based. Most of Apples tech was developed by other companies, many of which Apple bought up to keep other developers from being able to use the hardware and software. Much of the focus of antitrust investigations now are based on all of the buying up of the underlying tech by the big players over the last decade or so. This is why the Nvidia buyout of Arm is probably going to be blocked. The anticompetitive nature of all of it has gotten to be too much for new innovation from small(er) players.
Faust, LLVM, Blender, etc. What do you mean to imply by "rogue apps?" I'm pretty sure LLVM isn't going to try and knife me in the back and steal my jewels.
"Rogue" because they are not approved through the App Store. Any other word could be substituted if you prefer.
I like the apps on iOS. You don't have to. There are plenty of other options. Why a person could even buy a Portastudio and make music the old fashioned way.
Let's imagine for one second the idea is viable: why would you need a distributed ledger? A distributed database would never be allowed under the current App Store model, so in this case you might as well suggest that a trusted party, like for example Apple, maintains a centralised database for app ownership (which they already do BTW) .
Apple could allow for apps to be transferred from one account to another if they so wished. That could even include a royalty to the original developer.
NFTs, blockchain, etc have absolutely nothing to do with this problem, apart from being buzzwords that people like to throw around.
There is simply nothing in this use-case scenario that requires blockchain or a distributed database. Just a regular centralised database would be infinitely more efficient and cost-effective, and wouldn't require the carbon footprint of a small town to transfer ownership from one person to another.
OK, I'll substitute "third party developer" for rogue. Rogue just happens to have a connotation that fits Apple's narrative that all developers and stores except Apple are thieves and bad actors that can't be trusted with your details. Only Apple can be trusted with the moral high ground of loot boxes in games on iOS.
Not sure what NFTs (which are a con btw) bring to this. The problems are:
a) That Apple is a closed, monopolistic, ecosystem that tightly controls what the users can install on the OS - so that when developers stop paying the developer tax users lose access to their apps.
b) Old apps no longer work on IOS because their developers don't update them.
In theory you can often run old apps on VMs, and I guess you could do this with IOS apps.
For more on the problem with NFTs/blockchain et:
https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/web3-bullshit.html
You might want to include something in your apps to be able to NFT my exported tunes and drop them right into the Kymatica market to sell. Make a few pence on everyone's creations on top just the sale of AUM itself
Now, you I might be tempted to engage in a reasoned debate about blockchain with. But seeing as my two (very modest) investments in blockchain related technology companies are down 45% and 85% I'll ... just quietly walk away. 😂
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that. ☹
Thanks man. Happily, my other Crypto investments more than make up for those small losses. So far. Could evaporate any day, I know, I know, I know ...
Apple is not operating a monopoly for anything. Real words and definitions matter when talking about things which are not limited to personal opinion.
iOS devices are still computers and there are a LOT of options when it comes to computers. Developers like iOS because that’s where the money is.
>
A monopoly exists when a specific person, or enterprise, is the only supplier of some commodity, or service. Is there some other company/person offering developers the ability to sell apps on the AppStore, or allowing consumers to buy apps from other places? If your answer is no, then Apple is a monopoly.
You obviously think that this is a good thing, which is fine. Reasonable people can argue over this, and there is no clear answer. However it IS a monopoly.
None of this has anything to do with whether Apple's control of the AppStore is monopolistic.
The term "monopoly" does not apply to a company which does not have majority control of all phones and/or computers sold. Android phones and Windows computers outsell Apple's by a wide margin.
I think this will go round in circles. Domestic monopoly laws vary across countries, and in the US monopoly laws are applied differently based on the industry sector, many of which have their own regulatory bodies providing oversight.
Monopoly means different things in different contexts.
I didn't say they have a monopoly on computers, or phones.
Does their App Store operate in a vacuum? Or do they have competitors with far greater market share? Apple being highly profitable compared to their competitors has nothing to do with allegations of monopoly status.
i honestly think this is 100% the future. may not be for 10 years or so, but it will happen. something along these lines at least.
I'm still mesmerised by the OP's claim that one can sell a used trumpet 100 years after buying it. Some forum members seem to live forever!
I think a blockchain based system would make perfect sense for what the OP had in mind: an independent trustworthy system to publicly declare and transfer ownership of digital goods. Companies come and go. There are rarely any companies that exist for 50 years or more. If your proof of ownership depends on a company then the proof simply disappears if the company ceases to exist. If Apple goes bankrupt and the AppStore shuts down we are loosing all our apps. This may seem to be unlikely but actually is the truth.
To be fair this is not only true for Apple. Usually we never own software when we buy it. We just buy a license for using it. Any software that has an online system to verify the license would also be unusable if its manufacturer disappears.
On the other hand software is very unlikely to be useful or even able to run if it is some decades old. Probably only in an emulator. With the old home computer games from the 1980s exactly that happened. And it also shows the legal aspects of it. This is usually called abandonware. But there is also the cultural interest to preserve these games to document the history of computer games. The archivers had to break the license enforcement or copy protection and that required an exception in the DMCA. Unfortunately this exception is time limited and simply usually extended and it only covers archivers not customers who bought these games. IMHO this is not a very trustworthy ground to stand on.
Now coming back to blockchain. If all software licenses would be related to a transferrable token on a blockchain it would perfectly possible to lawfully handle ownership of digital goods even if the manufacturer is not existing anymore. The blockchain is trustworthy because it is independent from any company or government and exists as long as people run nodes for this blockchain. The only risk that remains is that if a malicious entity manages to gain control over the majority of the nodes of that blockchain then they would be able to rewrite history and change the ownerships. That would have to be addressed.
Sorry @krassmann but that argument is ridiculous. A blockchain is nothing but a database. If Apple goes bankrupt, what does app ownership even entail? How can you own an app on the blockchain if the parent company that makes the hardware no longer exists?
The blockchain is a database, nothing more - it does not confer any special legal rights, it does not assign ownership of anything in any legal sense. Just because there is an entry on a ledger does not mean that the law recognises it as such. I can make a spreadsheet conferring ownership of my apps and it would have as much legal weight as an NFT.