The Dearth of Universal Apps

App Store pricing is still in a state of flux. Earlier today, we reviewed an app that once cost $49.99 and now sells for $1.99. An app on the iPhone may cost double that when it is repackaged for the iPad. Sometimes the extra cost is justified; other times it is clearly not. Where, then, does the universal app fit into all of this?

Universal apps are those that need only be purchased once; you may install it on all of your iPod Touches, iPhones, and iPads at no extra cost. There is a single app, even though it will look quite different when loaded on the iPad. This may mean beefed up graphics (at least sporting a higher resolution), use of the expanded screen size, and perhaps a few extra features that take into account the iPad's power and size. Considering that the universal app is cross-platform, we don't usually expect much difference between the two. In fact, we more often than not prefer it that way, as we don't want the iPhone version of the same app to be gimped just because the iPad is a newer machine.

We're very pleased that Apple has allowed developers to release universal apps; it brings a sense of fairness to the App Store. Some developers may not be so thrilled with the idea, though, as they have repackaged some of their best-selling software for the iPad as unique apps with a price increase. You don't just have to buy it twice; you often have to pay more for it the second time around. Some apps merely look better but lack any additional features; others even lack some features present in the iPhone version simply because the apps were rushed for a launch release.

This sounds like bad business, as it can hurt a developer's reputation with its customers. Their reasoning for opting out of making universal apps is quite clear: extra development time (for the iPad version) equals extra costs, costs that must be recouped by reselling the app to you. That's one school of thought.

On the other hand, there is the value-added approach. I may not be willing to dole out more dollars for the same game with a higher resolution, for instance, but if you make this app work on multiple platforms, I'm much more likely to rate it higher in the store and tell friends about it, all because additional value has been given to my software. It's like a thank-you from the developers for buying their app.

It essentially boils down to short-term profit versus long-term profit: Cash in on the launch fever, or build customer relationships that will ensure longevity of the app (and most likely the company behind the app).

The App Store will still be in flux for the foreseeable future as developers and consumers both figure out what is appropriate pricing. Our hope is that cross-platform apps will tend to shift more toward the universal app side of the fence, saving unique applications for the iPad to help differentiate the two platforms. We want the iPad to have legs, and for that it needs to show that it is more than a higher definition iPod Touch. Give us the goods, and we'll be happy to pay top dollar for it. Just don't ask us to pay for it twice.