Introducing Blocks! And in-app purchases, what do you think?

So it’s about that time again when I think you good folks could do with an update on cado.  We have been tying up a few loose ends on the coding and design front – the process of which never seems to end when seeking perfection. The latest addition to the greatest cad application (well we think so) is Blocks! That’s right; cado can import, export, explode and make blocks!

Building blocks

No, not those blocks!

As usual with these kinds of things, when we set out to incorporate Blocks into cado, there are a lot of things that were considered, and perhaps even more that were not. That seems to be the nature of these things, but we chose not to shy away from the challenge.

Blocks may seem like a simple prospect, but when you get into the detail on considering the behaviour of a block, within a block, within another block, well that’s when things get interesting – as usual the Hat laughed in the face of Blocks (ok, if blocks did have a face, he would laugh at it).

You will be glad to know that all of the usual geometry edit tools work and you will be able to make a selection of vectors into a block for export. All of the blocks imported into cado will have their properties retained and listed for further use.

On a separate issue, there has been a lot of press recently on the potential misuse of in-app purchases in game apps. Especially when children may, unaware of the consequences, click purchase on multiple in-app features landing the unfortunate parent with a very large unexpected credit card bill.  Some of the critics comment that it is not fair to advertise an app is free, when additional features or levels can only be unlocked through purchasing them.

Although in a productivity app when one would not suggest a minor would be using the application, this may not be applicable, many applications utilise the in-app purchase model. We would like to know your thoughts on the issue; do you draw a distinction between games aimed at minors and productivity apps? Or should in-app purchases be removed or more strictly controlled in the app store?

Let us know what you think, and as always, if you would like to get in touch please do so at info@orangejuicestudios.com

comments:

  1. Vince says: (May 9, 2013)

    Hi folks.
    In app purchases….I don’t mind them in priceable, as long as the app provides the basics to start with. What I hate is a app that appears to be free and proves to be useless until you pay…..that really pisses me off.
    Don’t get me wrong, people should pay for the developers skill. Anyway looking forward to using your purposeful app, not expecting perfection straight out of the box……but PLEASE don’t emulate some of the dross we are subject to now.

    Vince

  2. Vim says: (June 3, 2013)

    Hi Vince, great feedback and thanks for getting in touch. We hope to get the balance right with between pricing – we think it is really a a game changer and want as many people to get to try it.

  3. John says: (July 22, 2013)

    I have no problem with in-app purchases, – provided I am not “nickel and dimed” to death for pieces I need to make the basic app work. If you were to team up with window and door suppliers who offered compatible blocks of their products, that would be great – those suppliers may provide them as a selling tool but in certain cases I would certainly buy such blocks. When you think about it, the sky is the limit. There are a ton of possibilities with in app purchases that would appeal to many users – again, provided the basic app is useable without them.

  4. Vim says: (July 23, 2013)

    Hi John, great feedback and we totally agree. We will be using in-app purchases however there will be a working functional app that people can use and actually understand how good the app really is. We also want to encourage as much feedback from as wide a range of users as possible and that will only come from users of the free app.

  5. Julio Guerrero says: (August 9, 2013)

    I’d like to chip in on this. I would rather pay for a complete and functional app, and then pay for a very specialized extension of the main app as IAP. Otherwise, I’d feel ripped.

    Example: the office I work for has a license for ArchiCAD, and since I do sprinkler systems, they bought the MEP extension for my exclusive use. But it doesn’t mean the main app is just “basic”. It’s complete, has all file import/export features, complete creation and editing set, etc. You can even create your own MEP blocks if you are willing to invest time on it, but the MEP add-on exists for convenience and has its own workflow and special features like checking for obstructions with other pipes and ducts, compatible fittings use, etc. Again, it’s something that maybe would be used by a small percentage of users.

    It would be annoying if you give away the app, but you want to charge for the “extended editing tools” or the “DWG file import/export module”. Those would be considered essential part of a complete CAD software, and from what I get from your posts, you do get that.

    A serious professional wouldn’t mind paying you guys US$200 for a really great and complete CAD app for iPad. I know I’m looking forward to it since current options are a joke.

    Can’t wait to try an all-iPad workflow on my discipline, since CAD is the only part left to implement on the device.

  6. Vim says: (August 14, 2013)

    Hi Julio, you make valid points and it is the position we started at. The example you referred to is based on the desktop software market which seems to operate to different pricing rules than apps. Increasingly people expect apps to be free, I know most of the apps on my tablet are free. This is a great table illustrating the same point (the blue is free)

    Flurry statistics for paid apps

    Now I think most would think CAD is a niche market and the target market would be professional CAD users such as yourself who would see value in spending $200 for the app. Although I think we would be missing a huge tranche of DIY or novice users looking to play around on CAD and explore their design capabilities. Although with free apps, comes the nuisance of pop ups, advertising and limited functionality which would really annoy the professional user, but they could pay for the full version once they have had a chance to test the basic app for free.

    Its not an easy one to call, hence we value feedback like yours. Thanks again for getting in touch.

(All comments will be held for moderation before being published)

© 2016 Orange Juice Studios All Rights Reserved