Adding iPad support to an iPhone project: universal vs two separate apps? [closed]

Question

I have an existing iPhone app and it seems that a significant proportion of my users these days are running it on iPad (I can tell because a lot of the emails I get from users have a "sent from my iPad" signature).

I am now implementing the iPad version and I'm doing it from the same code base, which is convenient to do. But when I'm done, I wonder if I should actually release it as a universal app. I could instead upload it as a separate, brand new iPad-only app.

If I make it universal:

• ✓ My existing iPad users will be delighted when they update and suddenly see iPad support.
• ✓ I benefit from existing ranking/traffic to my app, won't have to build it up from scratch.
• ✗ My iPhone users will see an update for nothing.
• ✗ User ratings might get confusing as the two versions are quite different

If I make them two separate apps:

• ✓ I can set different pricing for iPhone and iPad
• ✗ Existing users of my iPhone app who are on iPad won't know there's a new version for them. And if they discover it, having to migrate their data will annoy them. As will paying once more for it.

Am I missing any other tradeoffs that may help decide which route to take? Does anyone have experience to share from taking either route?

Answer 1

There's no other way about it. You should go universal.

The only reason against having a universal app would be different pricing (and I think that may piss off customers quite a bit. Especially the existing ones who are using the app on their iPads).

I can come up with loads of reasons:

• Customers see an app update alert for the universal support. Making a separate iPad app means you have to manually reach out to the iPad customers to notify them

• Code is more manageable. What if you're creating a data handling class that supplies information for tables/views? Why would you want to have two copies of the same code in two different projects? What if you fix a bug in the future and have to do the same fixes twice in different projects?

• Having a universal app makes you look more professional as a developer

• As your project continues to grow, having two different apps is going to be a development nightmare in terms of making changes, running updates, etc.

• Some third party libraries require some form of app ID to function. Others exist that require you to pay per app implementation. Why pay twice for different apps when you can have it done within a single universal app?

• Customer experience - Users who own iPhones and iPads will expect a certain amount of syncing of the app between their iPhone and iPad using iCloud et al. I don't think a user will be too happy to know that their data is not syncing across their devices.

• In App Purchases for one device would have to be bought again for the other one (this won't go down well with customers).

... I can go on and on all day. To summarize, unless you have a VERY good reason to have separate apps (and I honestly can't think of any), go universal. Universal apps come across as clean, well built, and professionally made. They make a good impression on the customers, and are a breeze to manage for the developer.

Making two separate apps for iPhones and iPads is like taking a website and splitting it into different standalone versions with their own individual domain names for different browsers... doesn't make sense :)

Answer 2

I saw an interesting blog post (below) where it shows that you dilute your download rank on iTunes if you have separate apps.

http://www.cocoanetics.com/2011/05/to-universal-or-not/