Thanks for the replies. It's interesting to see how different devs are handling this.
I do think it's important to note that if you follow approach #1, users that purchased your app will still have access to it on the tablet, it just won't be tailored to that device's experience. I'm not sure that asking them to pay for the additional work you put into a tablet version is a bad thing. It works that way on the iPad, with no issues. I'm leaning more towards option #2, but I'm a little worried about managing the different views in a single application. -- Chris Stewart http://chriswstewart.com On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:10 AM, Zsolt Vasvari <zvasv...@gmail.com> wrote: > For a game, #1 probably makes more sense. For a productivity app for > which the user had already paid $10 for, #2 probably is a better > option, unless you want to piss off your users. > > On Mar 18, 4:00 pm, Christer Nordvik <cnord...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am thinking about #1 since you can always slap on a HD at the end > > like "Angry App HD" and charge the users more. At least that's the > > standard practice on iPad. But then you have to have some extra > > features (or just better graphics) on the HD version of your app. > > > > My main problem is that the Xoom doesn't give the "tablet-only" apps > > any special treatment so it will probably be drowned in other apps and > > doesn't take advantage of current rankings of your app. > > > > -Christer > > > > On Mar 18, 5:44 am, Zsolt Vasvari <zvasv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am going with route #2, and I haven't had too many problems up till > > > now. The major stumbling block I see in the business side of things > > > is that I cannot charge more for a Tablet version than I can for the > > > phone version, even though the usuability can be much greater on the > > > tablet version. > > > > > Option #1 is not the best, as you pointed out, you cannot force the > > > users to pay twice. I can see forcing them to pay the difference in > > > price if they upgrade to a tablet, but to make them buy the app all > > > over is a huge no-no and you would end up with some very unhappy users > > > -- and rightfully so. > > > > > I think there needs to be a way to set price points based on the form > > > factor of the device. Hopefully, the Amazon market will have this > > > feature. > > > > > On Mar 18, 12:13 pm, Chris Stewart <cstewart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Now that I'm working on a tablet-centric version of my app, I'm > considering > > > > how it will impact my existing application in the Market. As far as > I can > > > > see it, there are two ways this can go: > > > > > > 1) Leave your existing app as-is in the Market. Build a tablet > version > > > > taking full advantage of Android 3.0, setting your minSdk to 11, > using your > > > > existing code base (as applicable) as a library to share core code, > and sell > > > > the apps independent of each other. Here you'll need to manage two > code > > > > bases, even if "only" the UI side which we all know varies greatly > from app > > > > to app. You're also requiring users to purchase twice effectively, > assuming > > > > they want the app on both their phone and the tablet-centric version > on > > > > their tablet. I guess the phone version would still work on the > tablet, > > > > just not optimized for it. > > > > > > 2) Integrate fragments into your existing application and bundle in > the > > > > tablet version along with the phone version. You'll need to drop > support > > > > for Android 1.5 for the compatibility library, work around API > differences > > > > between the phone and tablet APIs at run-time, and handle your UI > activities > > > > and views differently between platforms. I'm not sure about that > last part > > > > -- but it seems like with such a different UI concept behind 3.0 with > the > > > > Action Bar and the general flow of an application can be so > different, that > > > > you might need to break that apart. Could be very wrong there > however and > > > > would love for someone to show me otherwise. > > > > > > There are a few things at play here. It's the battle on the > technical side > > > > of dealing with different applications (package names, projects in > Eclipse, > > > > apks, etc). It's also bringing into question how you want to manage > your > > > > app; whether you want to charge for a tablet-optimized version or > include it > > > > with the phone app someone has already purchased. > > > > > > Depending on what I learn related to packaging tablet specific > features to > > > > an existing phone app, I'm quite undecided on which way I'll go. I > suspect > > > > many of you have already been thinking about this very subject and > I'm > > > > curious how you're planning to handle it. Please do include more > options as > > > > you see them. How do the different API versions impact your thinking > on the > > > > subject? > > > > > > -- > > > > Chris Stewarthttp://chriswstewart.com-Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
