All iPads The app-ecosystem & the iPad: shouldn't there be more 'default' apps and less clutter?

[Joplin]

Like many of you I like using my iPad. It cannot replace my computer, but most tasks I do in my spare time fare well on the iPad (browsing, e-mail, Spotify). One thing that is starting to bother me is the ecosystem around apps.


1. Needing seperate apps for sometimes very insignificant things. This makes the device feel cluttered. Great (and classic) examples here are of course the lack of the weather app and calculator that Apple provides on iPhones but not on iPads. I don't want to a) research different apps b) navigate through different apps for small, little things that could/should be a part of the OS itself.

2. Many well made apps have adopted a subscription model.

Wouldn't iPadOS be a better OS if more feature are built in by Apple? I don't like having all kinds of third party apps on my device (wth all the privacy concerns that are part of using, let's say, a third party distraction free writing tool that not only charges me every month but does who knows what with my data). Obviously Apple has a big financial interest in a thriving app store, but even for a minute trying to browse that cluttered, terrible store makes me wonder why Apple does not create their own daily planner app/to do list, or their own mindfulness app, or their own *insert whatever app they are pushing as their app of the day*. Even better: intergate this stuff straight into the OS where possible, the way flashlight apps are long since made obsolete.

Do you try to keep the amount of apps on your device to a minimum? Where do you see this overload of apps ending up?


I've considered posting this in the software forum, but I feel that the iPad section is where more 'serious' or professional users might find themselves.

 

[Shirasaki]

Apple certainly can spare their engineering and developer resources to create a ton of first party apps that is far better than any third party apps can be. But, look at Tiles accusing Apple of anti-competitive behaviour, look at Spotify etc. Is Apple willing to attract a decent number of lawsuits because of obvious “unfair advantage” (access to private API for example, and much deeper and better OS integration) to keep their lawyer regiment occupied? I personally doubt that’s the case.

Also, privacy policies on third party apps may be shady and questionable sometimes, but I’d say Apple is far from being innocent here. I would still safeguard my personal data and not handing it over to any company whenever possible. Apple is the best marketing company in the world, so I take their marketing stuff with a huge grain of salt.

Onto my personal iPad use, I tend to keep a similar library between iPad and iPhone so that I have a chance to pick up where I left. But overall I tend to not download and use a lot of apps at the same time.

 

[spiderman0616]

How does it really diminish your enjoyment of the use of the iPad THAT much though? Aside from the incredibly minor annoyance of having to install your own, after that, the experience isn’t any different than if the app had been included. Just to touch on Weather specifically—keep in mind that Apple now owns Dark Sky. You can pretty much read the tea leaves from there.

My major annoyance with iPad apps is that I wish Apple would start rejecting any app that doesn’t support Slideover, Split View, and Multi-Window. I’m a heavy user of the multi tasking features and I have several apps I use daily that are missing some or all of those features.

 

[sparksd]

I'd rather get 3rd party apps from vendors who specialize in their app's area of functionality. I have many scores of apps on my iPad and don't find it an issue.

 

[Joplin]

How does it really diminish your enjoyment of the use of the iPad THAT much though? Aside from the incredibly minor annoyance of having to install your own, after that, the experience isn’t any different than if the app had been included.

Well, of course it doesn't diminish it that much, as I can work with very few apps in general and it can be classified as a relatively minir annoyance indeed. But the points still stand, I think, and opening the App Store really sets the problem in plain sight. Just look at all the crap that is being peddled there, jeez... Who needs this? And all of this stuff is riddled with ads and subscriptions.

The unfair competition aspect is (together with the lucrative Apple tax) a big factor, I think. We can all agree on the fact that iPads are pretty great devices and while the idea of the App Store in theory is neat, to me it is becoming frustrating that there's not only endless amounts of shovelware but also many apps that could so very easily be improved and incorporated within the OS.

This'll always be debatable because people can (and should) champion user freedom in installing software, but on a very closed system such as this I find it rather embarrasing that just-above-basic users, for example, have to use third party file managers. Or a third party calculator. Come on!

 

[macdogpro]

I get what you mean.

I also try to keep my apps minimum and maximize what Apple built in the iPad OS, such as Pages, Keynote, Numbers, Notes, Reminders, Calendar, Mail (this one is also in regard of security concerns).

But others need 3rd party replacement such as creatives apps. iMovie is far from Lumafusion. And nobody uses iMessage on where I live.

As for in app subscription, I’d avoid all those apps. No matter how good they are such as the Adobe’s and Microsoft apps. I’d rather find cheaper - one time purchase alternatives.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I haven’t no real complaints with the App Store. I don’t want an open Google Play store type atmosphere and product offering. I like the safety and cohesiveness of the Apple App store. I do think Apple should and could do better with their stock apps.

 

[AutomaticApple]

I'd rather get 3rd party apps from vendors who specialize in their app's area of functionality. I have many scores of apps on my iPad and don't find it an issue.

Same here. I much prefer 3rd party compared to 1st party apps.

 

[ericwn]

Like many of you I like using my iPad. It cannot replace my computer, but most tasks I do in my spare time fare well on the iPad (browsing, e-mail, Spotify). One thing that is starting to bother me is the ecosystem around apps.


1. Needing seperate apps for sometimes very insignificant things. This makes the device feel cluttered. Great (and classic) examples here are of course the lack of the weather app and calculator that Apple provides on iPhones but not on iPads. I don't want to a) research different apps b) navigate through different apps for small, little things that could/should be a part of the OS itself.

2. Many well made apps have adopted a subscription model.

Wouldn't iPadOS be a better OS if more feature are built in by Apple? I don't like having all kinds of third party apps on my device (wth all the privacy concerns that are part of using, let's say, a third party distraction free writing tool that not only charges me every month but does who knows what with my data). Obviously Apple has a big financial interest in a thriving app store, but even for a minute trying to browse that cluttered, terrible store makes me wonder why Apple does not create their own daily planner app/to do list, or their own mindfulness app, or their own *insert whatever app they are pushing as their app of the day*. Even better: intergate this stuff straight into the OS where possible, the way flashlight apps are long since made obsolete.

Do you try to keep the amount of apps on your device to a minimum? Where do you see this overload of apps ending up?


I've considered posting this in the software forum, but I feel that the iPad section is where more 'serious' or professional users might find themselves.

Agree, weather and calculator should be there. Even Federighi acknowledged that fact when speaking to John Gruber after WWDC I think.

Third party apps are essential on a software market, regardless of where. They offer innovative new ideas and concepts or take the existing to a new level.

Having too many first party apps kills competition and therefore slows the development of your platform down.

Subscription models are the standard in the software industry and a fair way to use things you take great value of while at the same time ensuring a stream of revenue to the developers of those apps. It’s either that or go back to $99 per program back when we bought stuff on DVD.

 

[rui no onna]

Subscription models are the standard in the software industry and a fair way to use things you take great value of while at the same time ensuring a stream of revenue to the developers of those apps. It’s either that or go back to $99 per program back when we bought stuff on DVD.

I actually wouldn’t mind just paying more for major version changes.

I like Infuse’s model. They offer very affordable subscriptions for Pro features ($0.99/mo, $9.99/yr) but they also offer a lifetime Pro sub ($59.99) as well as standalone Infuse Pro versions.

 

[akash.nu]

I actually wouldn’t mind just paying more for major version changes.

I like Infuse’s model. They offer very affordable subscriptions for Pro features ($0.99/mo, $9.99/yr) but they also offer a lifetime Pro sub ($59.99) as well as standalone Infuse Pro versions.

A lifetime subscription is basically putting a nail on the coffin because they will keep needing to support the existing customers and there’re would not be any new revenue coming in, which means eventually that river will dry out and the company will shut down. Software development is very expensive if you really want to make something useful and usable by a lot of people.

 

[rui no onna]

A lifetime subscription is basically putting a nail on the coffin because they will keep needing to support the existing customers and there’re would not be any new revenue coming in, which means eventually that river will dry out and the company will shut down. Software development is very expensive if you really want to make something useful and usable by a lot of people.

True so the dev should price it accordingly. In the case of Infuse, the lifetime Pro sub is equivalent to 5-6 years of monthly or annual subscriptions so I expect most people opt for the monthly/annual subscriptions.

As I mentioned, I prefer to just buy the standalone Infuse Pro apps when there's a major update. An expectation of unlimited app updates is unreasonable but I also don't wish to continue paying simply to access an app or app features that don't require further software development.

 

[Abazigal]

As mentioned above, I think Apple walks a fine line between making their core apps “good enough” for the majority of their users, while taking care not to make it so good that there is no reason to get a third party app ever.

Take their podcast app for example. It does what you would expect it to do - play podcasts. If you want more functionality, you can go with another offering such as overcast.