Bad!
This app has only 1 search criteria, by the leaf, and then give you a long list of “matches” with only 1 photo each and not much of a description of the tree. It’s almost impossible to identify with this app.
Bad
Horrible. Don’t waste your money or your time
Washington State
I do not see Washington State listed. I see only Washington, DC. We have different vegetation on the two coasts. Please fix. Thanks.
No Washington State?!?
You can imagine my disappointment to find out that The Evergreen State was not listed in this app. :(
Missing Washington
I suppose this would be a useful app if I lived in a state listed in the guide. Unfortunately I live in the State of Washington. They have Washington DC available, but no Washington. Virginia? Yes. West Virginia? Yes. But alphabetically between, where Washington should be... only Washington DC.
Cumbersome and not intuitive
The gps location finder is stuck on the east coast . This app is not worth the time or $5 I wasted
Missing info
App would be better if there were more pics of the bark—it’s hard to know what leaves look like in the winter. Also, measurements should be in inches and centimeters, not just centimeters. App always defaults to NY, should be last state searched.
Identification
If your looking for an app to identify for you, this isn’t it. You will have to have some knowledge of what your looking for in order to use this app.
Geography is way, way off
Washington State is a state— like a province—on the West Coast of the United States of America. Washington, DC is the capital of the United States. It is a city in the District of Columbia, on the East Coast of the United States. The District of Columbia is a not a state, but is a bit like one, and for purposes of a nature app should be treated like one. The bottom line is that they are NOT the same thing, or anywhere near each other, yet this app treats them as the same. If you want to see what trees there are in Washington, DC , you cannot— it will give you the trees for Washington state. If you want the trees for Washington state, you have to pick Washington, DC. If the developer is this profoundly ignorant of geography, it is hard to believe that the app can be trusted at all.
Show more
Useless.
I was excited to find this, but The identification guides are so general and the number of trees that are missing from the list is Totally disappointing. I have tried to find five trays that I know well and they’re not even listed. I wish I had not bought the whole pack of birds, trees, etc. I guess the rest are probably just as bad as this one. A total waste of money and time.
Show more
Very disappointed
Once you get to a group of possible trees, there are no leaf pictures, no bark pictures, in the case of walnut it only shows the fruit. Definitely not what I was looking for.
You forgot something
Just purchased this and I found that my state, Washington, didn’t make the list.
Has potential but needs refinement
This is s review of the Trees USA app.
My start screen is set to the Gallery Page. It is the page with the cartoon pictures of deciduous trees, shrubs, conifers, and vines. Every time I open the ap, it defaults to New York. It would be better to stay on the previous setting. The categories are not correct. For example a live oak is an evergreen but is listed in the deciduous category. A bald cypress is listed as a conifer but is also deciduous. There are also many trees listed in my home state that do not grow here.
The identification page seems to work well except it list all trees not just the one filtered by the state. An exact search with a particular state or with the state set at “all” returns the same results. Also the “habitat” section is very weak (swamp, lakeside, mountains, etc would be much better)
The alphabetic listing with the pictures is ok. Again the state filter does not work here. In general the pictures are well done and there are enough to help with identifying a tree. A useful feature to add would be while looking a particular tree if you could click the family and see all the trees in that family.
If the filters worked properly this could be a very useful app.
Edited 04-16-18 to add:
There are no maps (that I can find) to show the range of each tree.
My start screen is set to the Gallery Page. It is the page with the cartoon pictures of deciduous trees, shrubs, conifers, and vines. Every time I open the ap, it defaults to New York. It would be better to stay on the previous setting. The categories are not correct. For example a live oak is an evergreen but is listed in the deciduous category. A bald cypress is listed as a conifer but is also deciduous. There are also many trees listed in my home state that do not grow here.
The identification page seems to work well except it list all trees not just the one filtered by the state. An exact search with a particular state or with the state set at “all” returns the same results. Also the “habitat” section is very weak (swamp, lakeside, mountains, etc would be much better)
The alphabetic listing with the pictures is ok. Again the state filter does not work here. In general the pictures are well done and there are enough to help with identifying a tree. A useful feature to add would be while looking a particular tree if you could click the family and see all the trees in that family.
If the filters worked properly this could be a very useful app.
Edited 04-16-18 to add:
There are no maps (that I can find) to show the range of each tree.
Show more
App will not download after purchase
I paid for this app but it will not download.
Trees USA
The app needs reorganization by region so you can quickly eliminate trees or shrubs you won’t see the your current location. It could use other such filters to more quickly zero in on the plant in question. Offering the ability to submit a photo of your plant would also be useful. And of course more species need to be added.
Alan McCoy
Alan McCoy
Show more
Useless
-Doesn’t have my state.
-Some photos are distant so can’t really see the leaves well.
-great idea tho
-Some photos are distant so can’t really see the leaves well.
-great idea tho
Needs more pictures
I live in Vermont. During winter months there are no leaves on many of the trees. I would like to be able to identify trees by their bark. You don’t offer this. Plus I would rather see real pictures of trees and leaves not cartoons.
Won't download
I can't even get this app to download after trying for several weeks. I hope Apple will refund my money.
Decent, but needs some additional features
Frankly I’m confused by some of the other reviews that claim it doesn’t have whole-tree photos. Mine certainly does.
My complaints: 1. It needs a glossary. There are many specialized terms in botany, and having to google them is a pain. 2. App doesn’t remember my selected US state from one launch to the next. It always goes back to NY.
My complaints: 1. It needs a glossary. There are many specialized terms in botany, and having to google them is a pain. 2. App doesn’t remember my selected US state from one launch to the next. It always goes back to NY.
Show more
Response from developer
Dear customer, thank you so much for your review. And also thank you for pointing out there indeed are whole-tree images. Good idea including a glossary, we will discuss this for upcoming updates. The second mentioned issue is a bug - the good thing is we have fixed this. The app won't jump back to screen one again with the next update.
Rip off
I wish I would've done a bit more research before purchasing and I wish I could get my money back. If you don't already know the name of the tree, you're out of luck with out a lot of clicking around. A tree outside the window at work, common around town, isn't even in the app. Very disappointed. Feel ripped off
Show more
