Quote:
Originally Posted by endoftheQ
In that case, wouldn't it be a great idea to make the iPhone App universal, insomuch that it could take advantage of the iPad screen estate without pixel-doubling?
|
We actually experimented with that, but it turned out to be a terrible user experience which we didn't (and don't) want to promote.
Quote:
I think Omni may have seriously missed a trick in not porting all its desktop programs over to the iPhone first (ok, maybe not OmniDazzle!) and offering this kind of universal solution, then concentrating on developing specific iPad versions.
As I mentioned in a previous post, the lack of iPhone versions is one of the reasons that myself and others have not only abandoned OG and OGS on the iPad but also the desktop programs. The fact the OO is only a strong possibility on the iPhone has led some of us to already abandon OO for Mac and seek other solutions, which means we won't be buying OO for the iPad either.
|
Designing a productivity app to leverage the strengths of an iPhone is a rather different problem than designing one which leverages the strengths of an iPad. We've already bitten off a huge amount of work in committing to bring five apps to iPad, we need to finish that work before we commit to building even more apps. (Designing and building a quality productivity app typically takes a team at least two years—and we've already built three so far this year! I'm incredibly proud of what our teams have managed to accomplish in such a short time.)
Quote:
Unfortunately, it feels like I've ended up with half finished scenarios with completion pushed back every time Apple yells "hop!".
The Mac App Store anyone?
|
Oh, maybe this wasn't obvious, but the Mac App Store is simply an alternate distribution channel for our products, it shouldn't require significant design or engineering resources. (In fact, the biggest short-term effect is that it will let us retire our retail distribution channel, freeing up administrative resources.)