Logic Pro X is such a big update, at such a reasonable price (for a pro app), Apple has so much money, and pro apps are such a small part of their business, that they may well be effectively immune to any negative sentiment this causes. However, there's historically been a large amount of backlash when developers charged for new apps.
I have no problem supporting great developers and designers, including those that work for Apple, and especially for software that used to cost many times what it does now. I did the same when Tweetie 2 launched as a new app, and versions of Twitterrific, and Instacast, and many other apps. I bought the new Logic Pro X this morning and paid $199 for it as well. So, for those of us, developers, designers, journalists, and customers alike who've been wondering what would happen when this day came, wondering just what Apple would do when one of their paid apps came up for update, well, we may effectively have our answer.įor the record, I bought the old Logic Pro a couple of weeks ago, and I paid $199 for it. One instance does not a pattern make, of course, but we'll likely never get a ton of data points on this simply because Apple doesn't make a ton of paid apps, especially not pro apps. Everyone who bought the original Logic Pro yesterday for $199, if they want the new Logic Pro X today, now has to buy it again for another $199. And it turns out, for Logic Pro X, the third option is exactly the one Apple went with.
iWork languished for years (and now rumor has it it might go free in the future), Final Cut Pro X already had its big update and X2 is nowhere in sight.Ībsent anything else, speculation ran from Apple enabling proper, traditional App Store upgrades just in time for their own release, to Apple bending/breaking their own rules to their own advantage, to Apple simply switching to free for everything.īut now, finally, Logic Pro X. Apple, it turned out, was in no hurry to offer updates.
After Apple moved iWork and then pro apps to the iOS and Mac App Store, it was wondered how Apple would handle updates for them when the time came. The third option has the same complexity and orphaned app issues as the second, maximizes potential revenue, but pisses off almost all existing users.įor a long time now, the community has wondered what Apple would do. The second option increases complexity, pisses of overly-entitled customers who don't think other people should get the same discount they're getting, reduces potential income from new users, and leaves the developer with an orphaned app to take care of. The first option makes it harder for developers to justify the resources necessary to offer updates in the first place.