Yes so they want me to pay $65 a year to Hope they improve an innovate. Why should we be paying to Hope they do something. I have no issues paying $20-30 up front for the current features in the pro version. But to tell me I cant use the app any more if I decide new future features are not worth the money is crap.
Well, they said they plan to continue updating the standard version, and the Studio version promises monthly updates. So perhaps eventually the Standard version will have most of the features of the current Studio version. It just takes time. Most people were satisfied with Astropad standard leading up until Studio was released, but now that Studio is out, everyone seems dissatisfied with the standard version’s performance. I understand everyone wants the best available, but my assumption would be that a $30 flat fee just isn’t sustainable for all the updates they want to provide. We should all wait and see what the future holds. Believe me, I would prefer if the $30 version got all the updates that now cost $65 a year, but to me, something that works the way I want it to is priceless. But thats just me.
We all can agree that Astropad studio works amazing - Regardless if you may or may not feel the upgrade is worth the money. Even It may do something as simple as mirror display but the truth is it does way more then that.
Here are some things you cant do with mirror display
- You CAN’T crop/create a work space
- NO custom Magic Gesture
- NO Custom shortcuts for individual programs.
- no wifi option
- No upgrades based of consumer Feedback
In the end they will have more subscription options based on usage and features. It’s basic marketing. All you have to do is give them a chance to do so. If they don’t then go spend your money elsewhere because you will.
That’s all fine and great but I think they are pushing it at $65 and they want you to pay that every year! So if a year from now I’m like well maybe its not worth $65 a year I have stop using it. I can’t use it any more after. Just crazy.
Yes they sell it as a service even if it is just an upgraded software that will stop working when you stop paying. So it is like you pay on your trust in the team, and expect to have updates and from this year to the next a better software (and yes if you stop paying you have nothing).
The fact is, the standard version have stopped working for me after a year. How could I have any confidence ? I’ve none.
I was shocked at the price initially but after using it for the past couple of nights the flexibility that it gives me with my home studio is well worth the cost. The usablility and features will pay for themselves with one illustration. I’m happy with the boosted performance and the customizable buttons. I’d love the option to be able to wake the computer from sleep using the ipad and would also love it to be able to act as a second monitor as an option to mirroring but it’s very usable as it is.
You and I are like- gave up one vice to take up another; art.
I bought Astropad Standard a year ago now. The performance with PS CC was crap. Well, people say that the pixelation is not an issue for them, but for me it is…
Since then the Astropad developers were talking about updates and performance increases, but the problems were not solved and stayed the same. So till today i’ve never used Astropad in my Workflow due to the bad performance.
So now they come out with an update which solves the performance problems (Studio), but instead giving it to the customers who paid 30€ for that, they want another 65€ and as an annual subscription… That’s ridiculous!
Yeah I think at the end of the day, you do need a subscription model to support the development of professional apps. Astropad Standard can only support the needs of the amateur hobbyist.
Three observations to those who are upset and and rating this app down.
If you value your artwork highly then you will not bat an eye at the cost of good tools. Have you looked at how much it costs to for example buy oil paints, or colored pencils, or Prisma color markers? Yeah they are expensive but thats because they are actually worth it. I would argue Astropad, both versions are well worth the ticket price.
Secondly lets keep these prices in perspective. How many years of a studio subscription would it take to pay for a Cintiq 13HD? About 12 years, and many of these users are already using photoshop for which they pay 240 a year or more.
If you were on-board for the app and the idea and gave a 4 or 5 star review only to turn back now and give a 1 or 2 star review even though the app gained significant improvements in performance only because you want even more features that are only available in a higher priced app targeted at professionals well I’m sorry but you’re just venting. Think for a moment about how much time and effort and money it takes to make such a product. This isn’t flappy bird here. Not many companies take on the challenge of developing an entirely new video codec for a very specific use case in a constrained niche market. The fact that liquid worked as well as it did before the update many are now giving 1 to 2 stars was amazing to me. They just dramatically improved upon that, warranting if anything a glowing "thank you for all the hard effort guys!”
Some are calling the pixelation a bug, I would argue its a limitation of physics and is the product of a tradeoff of latency vs full motion video. Could it get better? Maybe. But fundamentally something has got to give between realtime responsiveness and full motion video. The product exists because the use-case of drawing can realistically make the tradeoff of full motion animation for targeted very low latency updates.
If you value your artwork highly then you will not bat an eye at the cost of good tools.
The question is “Is Astropad Studio the good tool for me ?” Answer for me and I speak only for me, it’s not.
After twelves Years I’ll still have my Cintiq, that’s the perspective (for me again).
Imagine how much the team got with the first Astropad. Did they just drunk all the money ? Of course not they made Astropad studio with it ! So the new financial paradigm is what it is. OK. A lot of people are really happy with Studio. That’s OK. And now the one who feels cheated just have to shut up, and just let the others make a brilliant picture of all this ? I will say “thank you for all the hard effort guys!” also. BUT I won’t be satisfied until Astropad standard will be as usable as studio in term of debugging and performance. I don’t speak about features.
I totally agree with your sentiments.
I would’ve like if Astropad offered in-app purchases for some of the Studio features without subscribing to the perpetual “rent-a-software” model.
For instance, lets us have an in-app purcjaee fpr speed bump to what is half of the speed of the Studio version. I not asking much but faster Astropad Standard that is closer in speed to the Studio version.
An in-app purchase for the multiple shortcuts sets.
I bet all or many of us would rather pay a series of flat rate in-app purchases to get some of the better Studio features that we were ALL promised.
I can’t and don’t want upgrade to a subscription model.
Fot starters, I don’t use the Apple Pencil with my iPad Pro. I much prefer Adonit Bluetooty stylii with my iPads. Adonit stylii are better designed with better materials and are better thought out!
AND I need to keep my older iMac on OS X 10.9.5 Mavericks becausevI use a lot of older, legacy software. So, this rules out ever being able to take advantage of the Studio subscription model anyways,
We can only hope that Astro-HQ keeps their promise to keep developing and improving both Astropad versions.
I agree with you though about their attitude about their previously paid customers, like us.
It is like they are telling us they don’t care about us or our needs for Astropad any longer since we already paid and are not paying them any longer.
I’ll pay them more IF they offer more of the speed and productivity features of Astropad as a flat rate, in-app purchase/s
I’ll pay them some more to get better features witout the subscription/“conscription” model.
I was one of the early users who paid the $49.99 price tag when Astropad was first introduced in the Mac App Store,
So, I feel more “burned” than those who only paid the $29.99 price tag for Astropad Standard.
Come on Asrto-HQ, give us Standard users some of the MAJOR improvements you are making available only to the paying Studio subscribers!
As another note on costs.
Do you know if you subscribe to Astropad for 10 yeara at the flat $64/a year flat rate, you have paid the developers $640! AND YOU STILL DON’T OWN THE SOFTWARE!!
Is Astropad iOS app worth $640 for 10 years of use?
If you can’t afford to cough up the $64 per year flat rate and choise the EVEN MORE “ripoff” monthly $8 per month rate, at the end of 10 years of using this app, you would havd paid Astro-HQ $960!!!
Nearly a THOUSAND DOLLARS! That is $100 per year (at the $8 per month rate) you would pay!
Is Astropad, an iOS tablet drawing/ mirroring app, worth $1000 you would pay to the developers at the end of 10 years!!!
You end up paying the developers an extra $360 dollars at the end of 10 years subscribing by the month!!!
AND YOU STILL DO NOT OWN THE SOFTWARE OUTRIGHT!!!
This whole suscription model feels like one giant money grab to me!
I feel that I paid for a great Beta App and the final version has arrived but I can keep the working Beta and still will receive updates, I saw some videos and the new product seems the tool we dreamed from start, I’ll pay for it in some months because after all they’re a small company with very limited resources and they’re making a great software and deserves all our support.
For me, paying for their new App in a subscription model is more like a symbolic support more than the matter about is fair or not. But I understand if someone else see it unfair.
Well you’re very generous because $30 is a lot to pay for beta software.
Of course I wouldn’t pay that for a beta, but this is how I felt it at the end, because the new app is far superior.
Yeah, compared to my Adobe Creative Cloud Subscription ($600/Year) the cost for Astropad Studio is peanuts. The $30 I paid for the standard edition is less than 3-4 tubes of good acrylic paint! The standalone non-subscription software that I buy for my Mac routinely costs me $350 - $1200. Professional tools cost money, and this is the first version of Astropad that can really replace a Cintiq for all uses. It would take 14 years for Astropad to cost me as much as one of the new Cintiq Pros. It really is a bargain for what you get.
I can see why some would be disappointed that the standard edition didn’t get the full speed upgrade, but the iPad Pro has a much better processor, GPU, and WiFi than other iPads. That may explain the difference in speed right there. The standard edition did get a pretty good speed boost before Studio came out, but that may be the limit of what they can do on an average iPad compared to the Pro.
“Well you’re very generous because $30 is a lot to pay for beta software.”
No, it really isn’t.
An Apple developer subscription (for access to betas) will cost you $99.
A one-year Photoshop subscription will cost you $120. The entire Adobe Creative Cloud will cost you $600/yr.
Good real-world paint brushes will cost you $12 and up. A single tube of some oil paints can cost $20-30.
You’re talking about less money that it takes to feed my family of 5 at the cheapest of restaurants. The studio app’s yearly cost is less than a trip to see a movie at the local theater. So keep it in perspective. This isn’t the kind of app that’s going to sell on the level of Mario Run. They can’t rely on volume in order to serve a niche within the iPad Pro user base. If the developers are going to continue to support and improve Astropad, they need to be able to make money on it.
There’s also the simple fact that Apple’s app store doesn’t allow for free time-limited demos, and that nobody will pay large up front prices for iPad apps (even games). So this is pretty much the only business model that they can work with.
Totally agree! I won’t spend my money for a beta software anymore. iPad Pro got a perfect screen with pressure but it just need a HDMI port to make it a real extension monitor. I believe some day apple will update the hardware and make it a real replacement of Wacom cintiq (maybe by selling a espensive adaptor…)
Not sure how that is even relevant but you’re wrong… access to any developer beta is free, it only requires an Apple ID and TestFlight. The purpose of the Apple developer subscription is to provide tools and registration for developers to build and submit apps on the App Store not for consumers to test out betas. Also Apple doesn’t let developers charge for software in beta programs.
I pay less for Creative Cloud but if that’s your cost then fine.
I think the real world analogies of art supplies are a bit silly. This isn’t paint manufactured, bottled and distributed to retail stores with overhead. It’s software, software can scale.
Not sure about your last points because I agreed that subscription models are probably in the best interest of both the company and the professionals who want that tool to exist and keep growing. Just don’t think the current offering is worth the price.