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 Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Great take on subscriptions and Apple pricing model by Jakob

245

Comments

  • @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

  • @pepebaõ said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    Finally words that make sense!

    The main problem with ios pricing for me is that there are too few users. With more users, existing indie dev pricing could be profitable. Like gaming apps can be cheap because they have a huge reach. Desktop pricing of course is higher - they have huge amounts of piracy there, plus you can resell your plugins.

    But, and it's a rather huge but, the arrival of logic will herald the porting of so many desktop apps.

    In that sense, maybe new converts will discover what great cheap native apps we have and go for those? But devs need to promote them, or we all need to make a concerted effort to get desktop converts in here, in the AB Forum, where they can be educated about the options - and indoctrinated into the infinite gas for cheap apps that most of us have, lol

    Most importantly, as I've stated a few times in various threads on this topic here, native indie devs need to up their use of the touchscreen so they really have a unique selling point against all the desktop ports coming in. Any who aren't doing that better have very unique apps in terms of sound or functions compared to what's available on desktop, otherwise they will flounder.

  • @NeuM said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

    I think you're more of a believer in the inerrancy of "the invisible hand of the market" than I am, and that's fine, I won't debate that here. But either way I think it's fair to say that Apple and other large software vendors manipulated prices in the early days of the iOS market to create an expectation that software would cost a lot less on iOS than MacOS. That's created a situation where it's very difficult to make a living selling software in the iOS market unless there are secondary revenue streams or the iOS app is essentially a "companion" to a desktop app or a subscription service. Maybe "the market" doesn't want developers to be able to make a living, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

  • edited May 2023

    @Gavinski said:
    [...]and it's a rather huge but

    ...I'll get my coat ;)

  • @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:

    @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I agree with pretty much everything.
    But I think there is plenty of catchup to do for iOS in order to justify the price raise. It is necessary, and it’s not about quality of the apps generally, but there are major things - file management, app support, OS support, resale, paid updates and probably many other things (all down to Apple, and imo dev involvement is necessary) - that need to change too to justify the increased cost.

    Or perhaps the reverse: Maybe the reason it is as low as $49 per year is an acknowledgment that the software will exist is a much more locked-down environment

    You are talking about Logic... I’m talking about pricing on iOS in general... if we all agree that it can only be sustainable if prices go up - is already close to desktop in many cases - than the standards should improve as well. No?

    Edit: also there is this big anticipation of other big players joining the platform... in that regard these are important things to sort out imo.

    Actually, for me, no. Like Jacob, I've been banging this 'app prices too low' drum for quite a while. To my mind, even with all the inconsistencies, irritations and general tomfoolery inherent in the platform, most apps are under-priced by a huge amount.
    I'd like to see iOS improvements of course, but this as as an aside, and not as a condition to be satisfied for developers (They who have no control over the OS) to be paid what their work justifies.

    So, this year bunch of desktop ports appeared on the platform, slightly pricier than apps in the past, generally without any platform specific considerations - still, it’s great news for the platform.
    On desktop these vendors can provide support for their products - identify you as a customer, explain that ‘x’ software runs on ‘y’ OS, tested, supported... they can send you an older version if updates broke something or advise you to roll your system back until certain issues sorted... nothing special, basic support...
    On iOS the vendors don’t ‘know you’, they can tell you that it’s tested on ‘x’ and according to Apple should work fine and refer you to Apple support where you will likely run into someone who knows nothing about the whole thing and can only dismiss you, because ‘it should work’.
    And this is just one of many tricky situations one can find themselves in and no good solution atm, for users and devs alike.

    This whole discussion is in the context of ‘pro apps are finally here’ and may attract pro users and vendors... but without suitable environment imo it’s unrealistic.
    I hope you see my point even if we disagree :)

  • @mjm1138 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

    I think you're more of a believer in the inerrancy of "the invisible hand of the market" than I am, and that's fine, I won't debate that here. But either way I think it's fair to say that Apple and other large software vendors manipulated prices in the early days of the iOS market to create an expectation that software would cost a lot less on iOS than MacOS. That's created a situation where it's very difficult to make a living selling software in the iOS market unless there are secondary revenue streams or the iOS app is essentially a "companion" to a desktop app or a subscription service. Maybe "the market" doesn't want developers to be able to make a living, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

    +1 on the idea that free market economics is highly flawed. We're not some kind of rational ghosts embodied in meat suits which we control at will. We're susceptible to all kinds of internal and external manipulations that are extremely hard to be aware of, never mind in control of.

  • @0tolerance4silence said:

    @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:

    @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I agree with pretty much everything.
    But I think there is plenty of catchup to do for iOS in order to justify the price raise. It is necessary, and it’s not about quality of the apps generally, but there are major things - file management, app support, OS support, resale, paid updates and probably many other things (all down to Apple, and imo dev involvement is necessary) - that need to change too to justify the increased cost.

    Or perhaps the reverse: Maybe the reason it is as low as $49 per year is an acknowledgment that the software will exist is a much more locked-down environment

    You are talking about Logic... I’m talking about pricing on iOS in general... if we all agree that it can only be sustainable if prices go up - is already close to desktop in many cases - than the standards should improve as well. No?

    Edit: also there is this big anticipation of other big players joining the platform... in that regard these are important things to sort out imo.

    Actually, for me, no. Like Jacob, I've been banging this 'app prices too low' drum for quite a while. To my mind, even with all the inconsistencies, irritations and general tomfoolery inherent in the platform, most apps are under-priced by a huge amount.
    I'd like to see iOS improvements of course, but this as as an aside, and not as a condition to be satisfied for developers (They who have no control over the OS) to be paid what their work justifies.

    So, this year bunch of desktop ports appeared on the platform, slightly pricier than apps in the past, generally without any platform specific considerations - still, it’s great news for the platform.
    On desktop these vendors can provide support for their products - identify you as a customer, explain that ‘x’ software runs on ‘y’ OS, tested, supported... they can send you an older version if updates broke something or advise you to roll your system back until certain issues sorted... nothing special, basic support...
    On iOS the vendors don’t ‘know you’, they can tell you that it’s tested on ‘x’ and according to Apple should work fine and refer you to Apple support where you will likely run into someone who knows nothing about the whole thing and can only dismiss you, because ‘it should work’.
    And this is just one of many tricky situations one can find themselves in and no good solution atm, for users and devs alike.

    This whole discussion is in the context of ‘pro apps are finally here’ and may attract pro users and vendors... but without suitable environment imo it’s unrealistic.
    I hope you see my point even if we disagree :)

    I do understand the points you are making. i just don't think the developers are the ones who should have to take the financial hit for issues that are out of their control. In reality, as much as things aren't how they'd ideally be, there are tons of people who have enjoyed (and are still enjoying) a musicians's paradise, on this platform. These irritations normally have workarounds that don't take too much dedication to navigate. Of course, that would likely be a whole different situation with all the fresh blood the new Logic might attract.

    Regardless, despite the inherent issues with iOS, many developers have managed to make great apps, that imo (No doubt theres, also) they aren't being adequately compensated for.

    As for offering support? That's something i'd argue should 'up' the prices even more, as at that point they are offering a desktop-like service. At such a point, shouldn't they expect to command desktop (or very close to) prices?

    Anyway...we're just sharing opinions. My disagreeing with you is not an assertion that you're wrong.

  • edited May 2023

    @Gavinski said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

    I think you're more of a believer in the inerrancy of "the invisible hand of the market" than I am, and that's fine, I won't debate that here. But either way I think it's fair to say that Apple and other large software vendors manipulated prices in the early days of the iOS market to create an expectation that software would cost a lot less on iOS than MacOS. That's created a situation where it's very difficult to make a living selling software in the iOS market unless there are secondary revenue streams or the iOS app is essentially a "companion" to a desktop app or a subscription service. Maybe "the market" doesn't want developers to be able to make a living, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

    +1 on the idea that free market economics is highly flawed. We're not some kind of rational ghosts embodied in meat suits which we control at will. We're susceptible to all kinds of internal and external manipulations that are extremely hard to be aware of, never mind in control of.

    Again, sellers are free to set their own prices. They don't set prices too high because that is what buyers are willing to pay.

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gavinski said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

    I think you're more of a believer in the inerrancy of "the invisible hand of the market" than I am, and that's fine, I won't debate that here. But either way I think it's fair to say that Apple and other large software vendors manipulated prices in the early days of the iOS market to create an expectation that software would cost a lot less on iOS than MacOS. That's created a situation where it's very difficult to make a living selling software in the iOS market unless there are secondary revenue streams or the iOS app is essentially a "companion" to a desktop app or a subscription service. Maybe "the market" doesn't want developers to be able to make a living, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

    +1 on the idea that free market economics is highly flawed. We're not some kind of rational ghosts embodied in meat suits which we control at will. We're susceptible to all kinds of internal and external manipulations that are extremely hard to be aware of, never mind in control of.

    Again, sellers are free to set their own prices. They don't set prices too high because that is what buyers are willing to pay.

    And I do agree with this and have argued it in other threads

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gavinski said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @mjm1138 said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @cyberheater said:

    @dendy said:

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    A sort of 😂 But really, worth to watch becsuse Jakob is taling about wider aspect of current iOS stage in terms of pricing of apps …

    Yep. He makes some great points. I'd be happy to pay £50 for the app and then an additional fee for upgrades. I don't suppose they are going to do it although there has been a lot of back lash about subscriptions.

    But would you pay $200 of $300 to own it?

    I would, but I've been very fortunate in my day-job career so that's not a prohibitive expense for me. I understand that there's a lot of folks for whom that price would be prohibitive, so it think it's good to have a low up-front cost option. I think a "pay over time" option would have been better to address that market, but the App Store doesn't do that, so oh well.

    I agree with Jakub that music software is priced too low on iOS/iPadOS. I have to recognize the benefit of this for many people who otherwise would be priced out of the market, but I also have to recognize that, from my outsider's view at least, it's very difficult to make a living selling music software for iPad. I'd love to see indie developers able to thrive on the platform.

    I am less concerned than many here about the "stop paying and you'll lose access to all your projects" aspect. The nature of computers and bit rot and so forth is such that eventually we'll all lose access to our Logic projects anyway. I mean, you may still have a floppy with a Cubase project you created on an Atari ST, and you may still technically own a license to Cubase for Atari ST. Can you do anything with it? Some day, probably pretty soon, if you have projects in Propellerheads Rebirth, you will no longer have access to them on iPadOS (as of today you can still download and run Rebirth if you purchased it when it was still for sale). That's the reality of all software on the iPadOS platform. It's not great, but it's nothing new. Even more so than on desktop platforms, you never really "own" software for your iPad or iPhone.

    I take issue with the assertion that software is priced "too low" on iOS. It is priced exactly where the market wants it. If people were willing to spend $50-$100 with wild abandon, then that's where the prices would be now. Music apps are priced low because that range is acceptable to the buying audience.

    I think you're more of a believer in the inerrancy of "the invisible hand of the market" than I am, and that's fine, I won't debate that here. But either way I think it's fair to say that Apple and other large software vendors manipulated prices in the early days of the iOS market to create an expectation that software would cost a lot less on iOS than MacOS. That's created a situation where it's very difficult to make a living selling software in the iOS market unless there are secondary revenue streams or the iOS app is essentially a "companion" to a desktop app or a subscription service. Maybe "the market" doesn't want developers to be able to make a living, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.

    +1 on the idea that free market economics is highly flawed. We're not some kind of rational ghosts embodied in meat suits which we control at will. We're susceptible to all kinds of internal and external manipulations that are extremely hard to be aware of, never mind in control of.

    Again, sellers are free to set their own prices. They don't set prices too high because that is what buyers are willing to pay.

    ...because the market was manipulated to create an expectation of unrealistically low prices, is my point. The problem with assuming the perfect wisdom of the market is that the market is subject to manipulation. Free market economics probably applies well at the "farmers market" level, but less so at the "multi-billion dollar software market controlled by a single entity" level. Somewhat ironically, I think if the EU gets its wish and forces open the iOS platform that two things will happen: First, it will be closer to the model of a free market. Second, prices will go up.

  • @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:

    @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:

    @el_bo said:

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I agree with pretty much everything.
    But I think there is plenty of catchup to do for iOS in order to justify the price raise. It is necessary, and it’s not about quality of the apps generally, but there are major things - file management, app support, OS support, resale, paid updates and probably many other things (all down to Apple, and imo dev involvement is necessary) - that need to change too to justify the increased cost.

    Or perhaps the reverse: Maybe the reason it is as low as $49 per year is an acknowledgment that the software will exist is a much more locked-down environment

    You are talking about Logic... I’m talking about pricing on iOS in general... if we all agree that it can only be sustainable if prices go up - is already close to desktop in many cases - than the standards should improve as well. No?

    Edit: also there is this big anticipation of other big players joining the platform... in that regard these are important things to sort out imo.

    Actually, for me, no. Like Jacob, I've been banging this 'app prices too low' drum for quite a while. To my mind, even with all the inconsistencies, irritations and general tomfoolery inherent in the platform, most apps are under-priced by a huge amount.
    I'd like to see iOS improvements of course, but this as as an aside, and not as a condition to be satisfied for developers (They who have no control over the OS) to be paid what their work justifies.

    So, this year bunch of desktop ports appeared on the platform, slightly pricier than apps in the past, generally without any platform specific considerations - still, it’s great news for the platform.
    On desktop these vendors can provide support for their products - identify you as a customer, explain that ‘x’ software runs on ‘y’ OS, tested, supported... they can send you an older version if updates broke something or advise you to roll your system back until certain issues sorted... nothing special, basic support...
    On iOS the vendors don’t ‘know you’, they can tell you that it’s tested on ‘x’ and according to Apple should work fine and refer you to Apple support where you will likely run into someone who knows nothing about the whole thing and can only dismiss you, because ‘it should work’.
    And this is just one of many tricky situations one can find themselves in and no good solution atm, for users and devs alike.

    This whole discussion is in the context of ‘pro apps are finally here’ and may attract pro users and vendors... but without suitable environment imo it’s unrealistic.
    I hope you see my point even if we disagree :)

    I do understand the points you are making. i just don't think the developers are the ones who should have to take the financial hit for issues that are out of their control. In reality, as much as things aren't how they'd ideally be, there are tons of people who have enjoyed (and are still enjoying) a musicians's paradise, on this platform. These irritations normally have workarounds that don't take too much dedication to navigate. Of course, that would likely be a whole different situation with all the fresh blood the new Logic might attract.

    Regardless, despite the inherent issues with iOS, many developers have managed to make great apps, that imo (No doubt theres, also) they aren't being adequately compensated for.

    As for offering support? That's something i'd argue should 'up' the prices even more, as at that point they are offering a desktop-like service. At such a point, shouldn't they expect to command desktop (or very close to) prices?

    Anyway...we're just sharing opinions. My disagreeing with you is not an assertion that you're wrong.

    I guess at the end of the day it’s about what you want out of it...
    Efficient (speed, reliability) - desktop, or
    Efficient (adventurous, creative) - iOS...
    Past that, if the service is the same, prices should be the same too...
    In my view the prices aren’t far of seeing recent trends, but the service hasn’t improved.

  • edited May 2023

    @cyberheater said:
    Just checking. Is this another Logic Pro thread?

    Hahaha. To be honest. The amount of emotions involving this topic is ridiculous and completely unnecessary.
    New App. Use IT or Not. Move on. Think about more important things in Life. God Bless.

  • edited May 2023

    I view the LP "subscription plan" as more of installment plan. The software really costs $4000. They let us pay in yearly installments of $50 over a 80 year period. It's an interest free loan actually.

  • @realdawei said:
    I view the LP "subscription plan" as more of installment plan. The software really costs $4000. They let us pay in yearly installments of $50 over a 80 year period. It's an interest free loan actually.

    Haha. Rest assured, things will change significantly over the next 5-10 years and the subscription ensures Apple will have resources to commit to improvements.

  • I've kept my app-spendings under control with less than $20 spent on apps per month and considering I could easily get by with the 'stock stuff' the $4.99 per month is more than a bargain...

  • @Lady_App_titude said:

    @Gavinski said:
    I think you missed Jakob's point about magazine subs - he was saying that the Loopy Pro model was more akin to that, not the Logic Pro model, unless I'm remembering wrongly.

    No that is precisely what I was responding to. My point is that subscribing to a magazine is categorically different because you are getting something completely new every month. That basic difference isn't mentioned in Jakob's post and is something I always think of whenever I see people trying to compare software subs to magazines.

    And you keep the magazines when you cancel the subscription, read them again, or you can sell them , or give them to someone else!

  • The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But back then there ware no services available I could subscribe to in order to get access to the magazines content, even the copies kept in the libraries got bad due to excessive access by other readers...

    Most software is more or less a 'time-limited service' due to various factors.

  • edited May 2023

    I agree with everything in Jakob's video. Especially the part about Loopy Pro's model. It seems like the best solution from multiple angles. I wonder how it's actually working out IRL for @Michael ?

    I also wish that someone of importance at Apple could have a look at the model for Loopy Pro. I'm anti-subscription, but the way Michael has crafted it for Loopy Pro seems like the most reasonable of all possible scenarios.

  • @zvon said:

    @Lady_App_titude said:

    @Gavinski said:
    I think you missed Jakob's point about magazine subs - he was saying that the Loopy Pro model was more akin to that, not the Logic Pro model, unless I'm remembering wrongly.

    No that is precisely what I was responding to. My point is that subscribing to a magazine is categorically different because you are getting something completely new every month. That basic difference isn't mentioned in Jakob's post and is something I always think of whenever I see people trying to compare software subs to magazines.

    And you keep the magazines when you cancel the subscription, read them again, or you can sell them , or give them to someone else!

    But do you genuinely often read them again? I have a whole bunch of 'anlogue' stuff stored with various random people back home. Books, vinyl, tapes, comics. Even a set of sennheiser turntables from my dj days.

    I don't really miss any of it, apart from maybe a few compilation cassettes I made for people that have a definite nostalgia value. But that's maybe less than 0.1 percent max of all that stuff. A few rare records yes, but I couldn't really care less about those at this point. I've been apart from them for so long that they no longer have much hold on me. Probably almost all I can find in digital versions, and I'm fine with that. And in fact, I don't even seek them out.

    If I want to hear music now, I make it 😂. I don't listen to much music apart from my own little experiments any more. Too busy checking out apps and doing interesting things with those.

    I agree that my own situation is different from many others, as I've moved around a fair bit over the years, but when you're in that situation, 'stuff' becomes a real pain to deal with.

    If you're settled in one place, it can be lovely to be surrounded by real objects that represent your taste in art, music, literature etc, so I'm not knocking that. But for me, to have just an ipad and maybe a few midi controllers, is golden.

  • @Samu said:
    The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But back then there ware no services available I could subscribe to in order to get access to the magazines content, even the copies kept in the libraries got bad due to excessive access by other readers...

    Most software is more or less a 'time-limited service' due to various factors.

    If anyone uses the magazine analogy, the magazines are not Logic Pro, the magazines are your own projects… which you get to keep. 😀

  • edited May 2023

    @Samu said:
    The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But once you read a magazine you can give it to a friend, sell it, give to a charity, roll it up and use it as a weapon or burn it for warmth.

    You can even cut it up and "make art out of it". Hours of fun.

  • @Simon said:

    @Samu said:
    The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But once you read a magazine you can give it to a friend, sell it, give to a charity, roll it up and use it as a weapon or burn it for warmth.

    Or you can run it through a shredder, pickle it and use it as cabbage!

  • @Simon said:

    @Samu said:
    The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But once you read a magazine you can give it to a friend, sell it, give to a charity, roll it up and use it as a weapon or burn it for warmth.

    You can even cut it up and "make art out of it". Hours of fun.

    Paper cut is no joke, but my iPad is way deadlier... if I need warmth I can always launch Gadget :D

  • Pete's new vid on subs:

  • edited May 2023

    @Gavinski said:

    @zvon said:

    And you keep the magazines when you cancel the subscription, read them again, or you can sell them , or give them to someone else!

    But do you genuinely often read them again?

    It depends, some are just gathering dust or in boxes, others I read regularly.
    Just for some musical fun and a change of pace, here’s the photo of an ad in the May 1962 issue of the Reader’s Digest Quebec edition that I read today, the Hammond Chord organ 12th anniversary!

  • wimwim
    edited May 2023

    @Lady_App_titude said:
    Another thing that PaperJakob doesn't really touch upon is the fact that the iOS App Store doesn't support upgrade pricing. That antiquated limitation should have been fixed a long time ago, and is a lesser-known part of what has driven Apple towards a subscription model in this case.

    I think you've got it backward there. Apple's preference to move everyone possible to subscriptions is the reason why upgrade pricing hasn't been implemented, not the other way around.

    In accounting terms, regular, fairly predictable, revenue stream is preferable to lumpy event-driven income. Expenses are relatively linear, and the better you can match that with consistent revenue streams the easier many things become. Cash flow (not that Apple has any worries there!), profit margin predictions, stock analyst sentiments, and many other things benefit from steady vs. lumpy revenue. No one has to worry how version X.X of Logic Pro will be received and whether margins will be justified by the R&D expense to make it. Also, subscriptions revenue is easier to follow and to forecast as it changes more slowly than product based revenue. It's just much, much easier to manage in many ways.

    You only need to follow the money to understand why Apple does or doesn't do just about anything.

  • Good vid by Jakob.

    He says we need higher prices to keep devs afloat.

    But he doesn't look at the other side of the coin: we have too many devs/apps for the size of the market.

    Actually, it is "too many apps that are quite the same"... i.e. 1,001 reverb apps.

  • edited May 2023

    I hate subs, I fear for the future of the platform as a result of this move.

    Jakob is right on two counts: app prices must rise, and the Loopy Pro model is the only one which I (grudgingly) must accept is fair to both customer and dev.

    But whenever has Apple played fair, or cared what customers thought? No headphone port, no personal backup for the stuff you bought, no fair upgrade plan, no guarantee your expensive third party hardware will survive the next OS ‘upgrade’ ? It’s Apple’s way or the highway, always has been, always will be.

    The great pioneering days of music app development carving out new weird sound territories on the iPad are drawing to a close. Prepare for the mainstream railroad to arrive. There’s a reason why the word ‘railroaded’ exists. Buckle up, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

  • edited May 2023

    @NeuM said:

    @Samu said:
    The Magazine analogy is kinda nuts. I had a lot of old magazines I subscribed to and bought stored in a good place and they deteriorated over time to a degree it was impossible to read them so the trashcan was the next stop for them.

    But back then there ware no services available I could subscribe to in order to get access to the magazines content, even the copies kept in the libraries got bad due to excessive access by other readers...

    Most software is more or less a 'time-limited service' due to various factors.

    If anyone uses the magazine analogy, the magazines are not Logic Pro, the magazines are your own projects… which you get to keep. 😀

    nope, it’s like having those magazines locked in boxes and when you stop paying subscription they took away keys from those boxes .. so yeah, you still a kinda “have” them, you just can’t read them 😂

  • @zvon said:

    @Gavinski said:

    @zvon said:

    And you keep the magazines when you cancel the subscription, read them again, or you can sell them , or give them to someone else!

    But do you genuinely often read them again?

    It depends, some are just gathering dust or in boxes, others I read regularly.
    Just for some musical fun and a change of pace, here’s the photo of an ad in the May 1962 issue of the Reader’s Digest Quebec edition that I read today, the Hammond Chord organ 12th anniversary!

    Reader’s Digest Quebec edition

    J'savais pas ça.

Sign In or Register to comment.