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
That's another good example. Korg has been getting a free ride as far as I'm concerned. They should update their apps. No excuses.
Not cool. Not at all.
I hope this decision is unmade, ASAP.
Why? As long as they continue to work, on what do you base the obligation to continue to update them? Because you paid once for an app, the developer is obligated to continue to add value to it indefinitely? Have you purchased any other goods or services that work that way?
Any company is entitled to decide whether the return on investment for updating an app justifies the cost of doing so. They certainly are in a better position to determine that than you or I.
Considering an app that works as "complete" is not the same as "abandoning" it.
I don’t know how these things work behind the scenes, but here is a thought; if a developer simply resubmit it’s app and note ‘minor bug fixes and changes’, that might be all that’s needed to keep an app available. I guess Apple doesn’t know if it actually received a technical update, just a signal in the App Store that the app is still alive and kicking.
🤔🤦♂️👎🍏
Nope, I answered that above. Apple runs automatic checks on everything before a human even maybe randomly checks it. You might get an update through, but it is probably going to be flagged by the system and it should be. SPAMing the update system to keep your app looking like it's being updated would be anti-consumer.
Sounds like you think Oracle should be forced to dump Solaris. Or, Computer Associates should be closed up by the govt. for selling old outdated B2B software that they just purchased from other companies.
According to the App Store, that app looks like it is compatible with my M1 Mac and runs on the latest iPadOS. Why does it need to be updated? Some people may actually still like that app. Although, given that Apple gives away GB for free with its Smart Guitar, I'd guess that Apple probably kinda killed the interest in the app. Still, for anyone that might want the app, why should it be unavailable to them?
The App Store clearly shows how long ago it's been since it was updated. If Apple added the order by update date I suggested above, you could make sure you never saw it in a search and wouldn't need to worry about. But, people who might actually want that app could still find it.
Yes. The backup is just the data. The OS and all the apps are downloaded.
While I can see how it’s unfair to some developers, on the other hand not updating apps might be costing them new sales, I’m speaking more so of apps that haven’t been updated in like 6 years because some people , myself included, might see it as abandonware. I’ve been about to pull the trigger on apps and didn’t because I’ve been concerned that it might not work well with an OS that’s 5 years newer since an apps last update. In some cases if it ain’t broke don’t fix it, but if an appears to be abandoned that I haven’t bought yet I’m probably not going to buy it.
Exactly! If developers are still selling these apps, I don't see why it wouldn't be a requirement to ensure OS stability, squash the odd bug etc. And hopefully the fact that there is such an obligation will encourage certain developers to really take advantage of those deadlines.
Well that sucks!
Thank you for the clarification.
You are assuming there are bugs or instabilities. The only bug I've had that was caused by an OS update was a bug on Apple's part and I couldn't fix it. (A really nasty bug that broke all apps that used Apple's builtin AU state saving used by presets and DAW documents saving. I was able to write a workaround for new presets and docs and that would recover old presets and docs when Apple finally fixed the issue. They did eventually fix the problem.)
The audio stuff on iOS and macOS is stable at this point --- has been for a while. Stable software is good. Artificially forcing software updates is bad -- very bad -- always.
Total shit. Rather than find out if it works, just delete it if not updated (f o r n o r e a s o n). Lazy, greedy c*%ts.
It will be nice to see apps get updates at least every 2 (or is it 3) years and 30 days.
This creates an incentive not to just abandon an app until it fails to function after an IOS update.
I'm not assuming there ARE bugs and instabilities. But were I a developer, I'd at least assume the potential to arise given yearly OS updates. I get that that's Apple's fault. And yes...I imagine how frustrating that must be, as a developer. But irrespective of where the blame lies, the customer should feel confident that apps that are being sold are as stable as those involved can insure.
There are many professions that require the annual, bi-yearly etc. renewal of licenses, regardless of whether there's any changes having occurred since the last renewal. And perhaps, in this case, it'll require nothing more than a short period of Beta-testing to assure current OS-compatibility. A bi-yearly maintenance check-up, if you will Again, I don't think the expectation here is feature-additions, app re-designs etc.
That’s the kind of thing that I was thinking - add some code that never gets executed or does nothing, and update it once in a while.
YouTube app:
Aka broke tube AU
Broke tube AU
Etc etc.
The buggiest thing on the Apple App Store is the App Store's "search" function.
Maybe they should delete that? LOL
Or perhaps just result in updates that do nothing or perhaps even create more problems?
Read it more like "we spent multiple working days fixing vulnerabilities and don't want to disclose what changed so you won't know where to look next", instead of "we just wanted to push a funny update log".
Unexecuted code is somewhat trivial to spot, and not likely to pass by Apple's checks.
Apple does a pretty in-depth analysis to check what you are doing with your app, after all, they don't want you to roll out your own IAP system outside their store or exploit anything.
The sad fact is that this just hurts the developers. Sometimes an app that hasn't been touched in months or years is just a stable app, and to push a new version you have to fix compatibility issues that were never there before because you need to update libraries that you have no control over.
That means sometimes multiple days of effort just to get it running back as it should, without even improving anything.
And then you push an update and it doesn't translate into an uptick in sales, so all that effort could be better spent on a new app. Or an IAP purchase.
Two cold realities, which I know many here don't like, are: 1) IAPs/subscription sometimes are the only way of keeping an app viable in the long run, and 2) hardware may be outdated the moment it's released, but at least 🍏 can't decide in 2 years that you cannot use it anymore because it hurts the KPIs they show their investors.
The point I was making is that it is very likely that there are no bugs in an app introduced by an OS update. If there are no bugs introduced, then why update it? If I test my software and don't see any issues or users never report a bug, then I'm not going to update the software. It isn't abandoned. It simply doesn't need fixing. I've had software run as intended for more than 15 years without a single bug fix.
That would be incredibly bad engineering practice. It also wouldn't work. The compiler won't add truly unreachable code.
Why should Apple be required to do things which are antithetical to their business model? The short answer: They shouldn’t. They should regularly jettison things which conflict with their ability to move technology forward.
This news helps me make a decision that I've been on the fence about for a while.
I've decided to ditch mobile music making and going back to hardware and invest in a multitrack recorder. When the time comes to mixdown and master, I will just send my songs out to a digital service. I'm exhausted from updates, crashes, obsolete devices,etc.
And by the way, that app is NOT compatible with M1 computers.
I doubt. They mentioned apps needing to be updated, as opposed to making them AUv3 compatible. Korg Gadget as a standalone app works, and they do update the app, even if it is simply adding new sound packs.
They won’t be as affected by this change, as something like Reason Compact.
They shouldn't be required to do anything. They should have been blocked from buying up all technology companies that would allow other companies to compete with them. Or maybe, patents should all be blocked as they are supposed to enable advancement and innovation in the market but they actually work to do the exact opposite. There's all sorts of political and economic arguments that we could have, but you and I both know that we are going to disagree on these points anyway.
As a practical matter, my main thing is that the iPad could be so much more than Apple allows it to be. All they need to do is get out of the way. The other point is that Apple is actively driving me away from developing for iOS. I have three pretty much complete AU's that I could release, but I'm simply tired of dealing with Apple. Their campaign to turn users against third party devs and make end users suspicious of all the evil developers is beyond tiring.
I don't see any of this in the same way you do and that's fine. I don't expect them to be right all the time, but they're more often right than wrong and the platforms they offer so outshine the alternatives that there really are no alternatives as far as I'm concerned.