Further to void’s answer, and just to manage expectations…
On top of the technical limitations that are going to exist as void has described, once you go into a “just a midi device” scenario, you are going to be limited by what is actually accessible via the midi specification of the device in question.
I’ve had the same scenario with the Octatrack/OctaEdit that a number of people have requested an iPad version, but the reality is that what can be achieved is limited via the midi specifications of the Octatrack.
So whilst in direct or overbridge mode, you can do a lot more, in “midi” mode you can only do whathever is available via the midi specification for the A4/AR/OT…
I’m not familiar enough with the midi spec of the A4/AR, and void knows a lot more about the AR spec then I do, so I defer to him and his greater knowledge in that regard.
But I can say from an Octatrack point of view, that if i was to build an iPad version of OctaEdit, I’d only be able to provide < 10% of the functionality that I can achieve via desktop based.
The same scenario would apply to Overbridge in an iOS environment, you can only access what is available via midi cc messages, as opposed to using the Elektron drivers which Overbridge uses.
So you may have an iOS version, but that might only provide < 10% of the functionality.
Knowing all that, knowing that it is still a significant development effort (thus time and cost), you are adding another platform / OS to support, maybe a second one as well (because Android/WinPhone users would want theirs as well), and that it is not a core part of your business process or stratergy (I assume/presume)…
Would you go to make that investment for such little ROI?
Hi void, we should talk again sometime soon…