$40? Seriously? [OmniFocus for iPad Pricing Feedback] [Archive] - Page 2

endoftheQ

2010-10-25, 06:04 AM

Surely that wouldn't make a lot of sense commercially as then Omni would be potentially losing sales of the far superior iPad app.

It's a good point, RiK.

However, the route Omni has followed (apart from OmniFocus) has meant they've lost the revenue stream of my upgrading OG, OGS & OO on the desktop, as well as upgrades for the same programs on my iDevices (if and when the App store permits it!). Likewise, I now won't be buying OO for the iPad when it's launched. For another Member's similar view on this issue, have a look at this post (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=10934&p=87022) on the OO Forum.

If you accept, as do I, that the majority of Members who have posted to this thread aren't price sensitive, I'm not convinced that launching universal iPhone/iPad versions (prior to an iPad specific one) would have had that much impact on sales whereas jumping straight to the iPad and ignoring the iPhone may well have done.

Also, customers who had an iPad but not an iPhone/iPod and didn't want the full bells-and-whistles of the specific iPad version (see tml00's post (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=16978&p=87888)) might still have been willing to purchase the cheaper universal version.

It could have even opened up the possibility of Omni offering upgrade pricing this way, by making the iPad specific versions an in-App purchase from the universal Apps. :)

ntrigue

2010-11-01, 06:59 PM

gopi

2010-11-01, 07:39 PM

Pricing of $40 in the App Store is tantamount to insulting existing users that have invested over $100 into a todo list.

$79.95 + $19.99 = $99.94, unless I'm missing something?

Your snarky "$100 into a todo list" seems to imply you believe that this category of software should never cost that much. I would've said the same thing before OF, because I'd never used software in this category that had this many features and, most importantly, this much labor and thought put into it.

Ken Case

2010-11-01, 08:57 PM

In that case, wouldn't it be a great idea to make the iPhone App universal, insomuch that it could take advantage of the iPad screen estate without pixel-doubling?

We actually experimented with that, but it turned out to be a terrible user experience which we didn't (and don't) want to promote.

I think Omni may have seriously missed a trick in not porting all its desktop programs over to the iPhone first (ok, maybe not OmniDazzle!) and offering this kind of universal solution, then concentrating on developing specific iPad versions.

As I mentioned in a previous post, the lack of iPhone versions is one of the reasons that myself and others have not only abandoned OG and OGS on the iPad but also the desktop programs. The fact the OO is only a strong possibility on the iPhone has led some of us to already abandon OO for Mac and seek other solutions, which means we won't be buying OO for the iPad either.

Designing a productivity app to leverage the strengths of an iPhone is a rather different problem than designing one which leverages the strengths of an iPad. We've already bitten off a huge amount of work in committing to bring five apps to iPad, we need to finish that work before we commit to building even more apps. (Designing and building a quality productivity app typically takes a team at least two years—and we've already built three so far this year! I'm incredibly proud of what our teams have managed to accomplish in such a short time.)

Unfortunately, it feels like I've ended up with half finished scenarios with completion pushed back every time Apple yells "hop!".

The Mac App Store anyone?

Oh, maybe this wasn't obvious, but the Mac App Store is simply an alternate distribution channel for our products, it shouldn't require significant design or engineering resources. (In fact, the biggest short-term effect is that it will let us retire our retail distribution channel, freeing up administrative resources.)

policarpo

2010-11-01, 09:17 PM

We actually experimented with that, but it turned out to be a terrible user experience which we didn't (and don't) want to promote.

Have you guys checked out the Universal version of 2Do on the iPad and on the iPhone? They managed to get a rather rich UI to work great on both platforms.*

The devs are able to leverage the Universal framework to focus on features and quick turn arounds on updates. They've already updated the app twice with some major features and are soon bringing MobileME syncing to the next update. Their Delegation, Sorting, Editing and Deferral tools are fantastic.

Thinking about the design from a Universal perspective might be a better strategy in the near future, since it will allow your team to focus on a single release and maintain a unified User Experience as well as Feature set on the iOS platform. It just makes sense from a Design, Engineering and Implementation standpoint, and really allows your team to focus focus focus and not think about 3 different problems when it comes to development.

If I were thinking about the future of OmniFocus, I'd look out about 3 years to really envision where it should go and focus on integrating that vision into a unified Desktop and Mobile experience.

Some core tennets of the vision could be things like:

. Unified Delegation Tools
- allow users to email Full Projects or N# of Tasks to one another and allow the back and forth transmissions to maintain the history of the Project (allow users to view completed tasks @ any point in the transaction)
- Allow the emailed Tasks to have a "Sent From" and "Version & Date" trail.
. Cloud Based syncing
- you guys do a good job of this already but I would keep pushing this to make sure you focused on a system which is extensible and highly portable
- maybe a Client managed Server Solution like Daylite offers for Teams wanting tighter security around their content
. Unified Look & Feel across the Product Line
- OmniFocus should look like OmniFocus from a mile away and should maintain some core design principles which unify it as a family
. Robust Note Taking Tools
- Imagine having something with the power of NoteBooks or Awesome Note be native on the iOS versions of OF. We already have a nice Note Feature on the desktop, and I see no reason not to make the iOS versions as robust
. Integration with Evernote
- This is just smart since a lot of people use Evernote for their centralized Reference system (a key element of GTD) and having this integration would attract a lot of Evernote users to OF
. Nicely formatted Email Task view
- You touch on this with the iPad, and I like it, but it should be a standard Layout on all devices so it is seen as an OmniFocus Task regardless of which device or platform it came from.
- The layout could offer a beautifully designed template option for users to select so that it emotionally communicates Tasks as: Business, Personal, or High Priority, etc.
. Multi Object Sorting and Editing Functionality
- Allow me to move, delete, defer, share, tag multiple items @ a single time from within any list view on iOS. Moving 30 items on iOS isn't fun nor very functional (really look @ how Taska and 2Do manage this simple function)
. Smart Functions
- Allow users to set up rules on Projects so that specifically Tagged items automatically show up in them. This could allow users to have Tasks appear in Multiple Projects if need be.
. Nicer Layouts for Projects & Areas of Focus
- Things does a nice job of visualizing this distinction, but totally misses the boat on making the user have to manage these features.
. Team Member Classifications
- I use Contexts to get my Team Member Views via a Perspective, so I'd think about shipping custom Perspective Views which account for certain types of workflows in order to get people up and running quickly in OmniFocus.
- You could offer 3-5 Perspective Bundles to the end user: Team Work, Projects & Areas of Focus, Now, SomeDay & Forecast.

I could go on and on, and I am sure you guys already are thinking about this stuff. I love GTD, and I just want it to get better and more fluid and enjoyable for all of us.

I think GTD Apps are now a dime a dozen, but there are a few keys apps out there which are really making waves and trying to help the user in Processing this Philosophy into their daily work and life flow. OmniFocus sits @ the top of the heap of GTD Apps currently, and you guys should remain there provided the current and near term vision is about taking us GTD Geeks to new levels of Focus and Horizons we didn't think were attainable with software. :^)

Cheers,
-policarpo

*note: Taska isn't a Universal app, but they've managed to create a rather compelling and unified design language to both of their products which really brings them into line as a family of apps on iOS (but the app is too buggy to be worth using on a daily basis).

Ken Case

2010-11-01, 09:36 PM

What the pricing has done is satisfy those that feel the need to tout their superiority (these same people will respond on their 11.6" MacBook Air). Pricing of $40 in the App Store is tantamount to insulting existing users that have invested over $100 into a todo list.

I'm sorry to hear you feel that way; it's certainly not our intent to insult anyone!

OmniFocus isn't for everyone. If your needs would be met just as well by a $5 to-do list app, then OmniFocus might not be giving you the value we're trying to provide—which means it might not be the right app for you. If you've already bought an edition and decided it wasn't worth the money, I'd strongly encourage you to take advantage of our money-back guarantee. We want each of our customers to feel enthusiastic about the great value they've received for their purchase, knowing exactly what they paid for it—rather than feeling like they overpaid for what they received.

Most people who have tried OmniFocus for iPad feel that it's really a different experience which lets them connect better than ever before with their tasks, particularly with its new Review and Forecast modes. I see many many tweets like these:

@hotdogsladies: Props to my OmniGroup pals for the stunning OmniFocus for iPad. GTD reviews made sane and--yes--FUN.
@stevensokulski: Just completed my first-ever GTD review because of how fun and easy the new @OmniFocus for iPad makes it.
@IrvTheSwirv: The Omnifocus iPad Review feature is a work of complete and utter genius. I'd say the desktop needs it, but why bother?... iPad is more fun!
@psyton: Have never been able to get a handle on GTD weekly reviews... until @Omnifocus for iPad. Now incredibly simple and useful. Thanks, Omni!
@drewmccormack: One aspect of OmniFocus for iPad that is better than on iPhone/Mac editions is the Review functionality. I was a lapsed reviewer. Not now.
@tonypiper: @OmniFocus have made GTD weekly reviews pleasurable thanks to the iPad app... Bravo!
@tchaten: @kcase Wow OF for iPad is beautiful from icon to interface -finally a GTD app that makes me want to have it open all day!-Forecast (amazing)
@gizmometer: . @OmniFocus for iPad was well worth the wait. Finally: relaxed work planning from my couch. (p.s. forecast view is top notch!)
@gvtmtom: The more I use it the more I like @omnifocus on the iPad. Overall it's quite good and the Forecast view is awesome.
@fakeMacFusion: Forecast view in @omnifocus for iPad is the bomb. Hope they integrate it w/ iPhone and Desktop version.
@chartier: OmniFocus for iPad is exemplary of what full iPad apps should aspire for. Lots of clever UI that solves unique needs. Hats off @kcase.

Now, obviously, just because a bunch of random people really like the iPad app doesn't mean that it will meet your needs. But if you haven't looked at what is actually new about the iPad edition, it's definitely worth taking a closer look.

As for the total cost to people who are already invested…

We'd love to offer an App Store discount to our current Mac customers. Unfortunately, our options are limited on the App Store: it doesn't support discounts on the basis of purchase history—or anything else for that matter; we can't even offer discounts to our own employees! We did take this issue into account when pricing the app, though—that's part of why we chose a price that's just half the price of the desktop app.

We've tried very hard to make sure anyone who has paid $140 for all three editions of OmniFocus continues to feel that they're receiving good value for their purchases individually and collectively, providing major updates like our recent release of OmniFocus 1.8 for Mac. Fortunately, I think the value equation works in everyone's favor, as the total package is worth more than the sum of its parts: OmniFocus for Mac actually gains more than $20 in useful value when you add the iPhone app to the picture and are able to bring the Mac app's tasks with you everywhere. And I think the Mac app easily gains another $40 in useful value when you add to it the Forecast and Review modes from the iPad app.

But whether you're using all three editions or just one, we're committed to making sure that each edition of the app pulls its own weight and gives you great value for what you've paid.

gopi

2010-11-01, 10:39 PM

We actually experimented with that, but it turned out to be a terrible user experience which we didn't (and don't) want to promote.

One of the other problems with making the iPhone app universal is that there would be no way to tell people, "Hey, this is not really the best way to make this work on the iPad. You will be a lot happier on the iPad native version..."

The App Store will make it appear as if the iPhone/iPad universal version is fully supported on the iPad.

My wife tried the "hacked" iPad full screen version of the iPhone app. She preferred it to pixel doubling, but when she tried the native iPad version she commented that it would be tough to convince people how much better the iPad version was without letting them use it. In other words: Give somebody a full screen iPhone version on their iPad, and they're going to be asking, "The iPad version can't be worth another $40, can it?" We both share the opinion that it *is* worth another $40.

wilsonng

2010-11-02, 04:49 AM

One of the other problems with making the iPhone app universal is that there would be no way to tell people, "Hey, this is not really the best way to make this work on the iPad. You will be a lot happier on the iPad native version..."

The App Store will make it appear as if the iPhone/iPad universal version is fully supported on the iPad.

My wife tried the "hacked" iPad full screen version of the iPhone app. She preferred it to pixel doubling, but when she tried the native iPad version she commented that it would be tough to convince people how much better the iPad version was without letting them use it. In other words: Give somebody a full screen iPhone version on their iPad, and they're going to be asking, "The iPad version can't be worth another $40, can it?" We both share the opinion that it *is* worth another $40.

A lot of iPhone app developers have created "Lite" versions of an app which are free. They have limited capabilities such as the number of tasks and/or projects. But it allows someone a free way to try out a program before putting down $40.00 on a program like OmniFocus for iPad. I just test drove Pocket Informant Lite for GTD recently. OmniFocus still kept my vote on my iPod touch and my iPad. But I can easily recommend others to try out Pocket Informant Lite.

The only other way I can convince others to try OmniFocus for iPad would be to lend them my iPad. But I really don't want them seeing my task lists so it's a little difficult.

I think an OmniFocus lite for iPad with limited capabilities would really win over a lot of new customers who are hesitant to plop down $40.00.

I remember reading somewhere that Apple is/was considering a separate section in the iTunes store for trial versions of programs.

With that being said, I am very happy with OmniFocus for iPad. Some programs lend themselves to a universal version and other times, it's best done as a completely separate edition.

I know I've gotten way more than forty bucks worth of value from my trio of the desktop, iPhone, and iPad versions of OmniFocus.

Treo

2011-01-07, 01:41 PM

I bought OF for iPad two days ago and have already reported four bugs. One of which is a silly design problem. Create a top level folder, then a project inside it and add some tasks to the project to see what I mean. It's the sort of thing you would have expected someone to try before release. Coupled with problems related to background operation where I have to keep quitting and restarting and I am left disappointed, my disappointment being in direct relation to the price i paid after putting it off for so long. Yes, support are wonderful and always tell you how grateful they are that you wrote to them, but I shouldn't have to be firing off emails twice a day. I've never once reported a bug to Toodledo developers (a cheap app I might add) or Things (another cheaper app) which trumps OF in terms of UI design if not functionality.

The only redeeming feature is the sync, but then I had that with Toodledo so why the hell did I switch? The thing is, perversely, I'll stick it out for a bit because I've paid so much for it. I think Omni have dabbled in the dark arts of pricing psychology. Their Mac apps can't be faulted, but I'm not sure what's happened here.

sjerwin

2011-01-08, 04:38 AM

I understand your frustration with the price, I initially felt the same way. But after spending about the same amount trying the alternatives, I am a loyal Omnifocus for the iPad user.

I liken Omnifocus for the iPad to a fine automobile. Sure, many of the alternative applications can get you from point A to B, but not in the same style and comfort as Omnifocus. And, if you want to be tired, frustrated and just plain worn out at the end of your journey, then pick one of the other GTD apps.

I don't own a Mercedes, but I have enjoyed riding in one... where else can you buy one for $40.

gazhayes

2011-01-24, 01:57 AM

I think the only reason why $40 seems too expensive is due to the average app being under $10.

I haven't bought the iPad version, but I have bought the Mac and iPod version. I actually bought an iPod specifically for OmniFocus, and 'aquired' a macbook and converted to a dual mac/pc person specifically due to OmniFocus. I don't have an iPad and I don't plan on getting one in the near future, but if/when I do, it will likely be *for* omnifocus. With that in mind, the price is quite acceptable.

The only problems I have with the pricing are the specific parts of the GTD model that are missing from OF. As long as upgrades that add these features (such as on hold for actions and/or multiple context) don't require me to fork out $ for an upgrade then I think the pricing is fair.

Tekneek

2011-03-06, 07:44 AM

gopi

2011-03-10, 08:59 PM

I will never understand why people think criticism of pricing means that a person doesn't believe producers can charge whatever they want, that they are against capitalism, and aren't "taking responsibility for their financial condition."

Let's not jump to so many conclusions all at once, please.

Some people write as if they think that. Virtually all of the people complain assert it as a fact that their own ideas about pricing are more accurate than OmniGroup's.

Seamusmacd

2011-03-14, 07:42 AM

I agree. $40 is too much. I own Mac and iPhone OF - seems way out of line to pay 2x the iPhone version. Owners of Mac version should pay less than standalone users. It just feels greedy.

whpalmer4

2011-03-14, 08:23 AM

I agree. $40 is too much. I own Mac and iPhone OF - seems way out of line to pay 2x the iPhone version. Owners of Mac version should pay less than standalone users. It just feels greedy.
It's a considerably more powerful program than the iPhone version, why shouldn't it cost more? As for bundle pricing, the App Store model makes that difficult; Apple does not identify the customers to the vendor (hard to give a discount on a subsequent Mac purchase), and doesn't allow different customers to pay different prices (hard to give a discount on a subsequent iPad/iPhone purchase).

It's a good piece of software, and if you're an active user of OmniFocus and use your iPad frequently, I think you would find yourself unwilling to give it up after a week or two. They do offer a 30 day money back guarantee on the purchase: http://www.omnigroup.com/blog/entry/30_day_guarantee/

slinberg

2011-03-18, 07:45 AM

I didn't read through all (presently) 27 pages of this thread, but I agree that another $40 for the ipad version feels staggeringly expensive. I was expecting something in the $5-$7 range.

I agree with those who think they'd make more money selling more lower-priced copies, and engender more goodwill.

I think what actually stings more than the price, though, is that there's no "loyalty" reward for OF. I've been an OF user since the pre-beta days, and bought the ipod edition too as soon as it was available. I don't see why, if the price has to be $40 for the ipad version, it couldn't be $10 off if you own the desktop or ipod version, and $20 off if you own both. It would still be a lot, but it would reward loyalty and make longtime users feel more valued.

whpalmer4

2011-03-18, 08:28 AM

I didn't read through all (presently) 27 pages of this thread [...]

I think what actually stings more than the price, though, is that there's no "loyalty" reward for OF. I've been an OF user since the pre-beta days, and bought the ipod edition too as soon as it was available. I don't see why, if the price has to be $40 for the ipad version, it couldn't be $10 off if you own the desktop or ipod version, and $20 off if you own both. It would still be a lot, but it would reward loyalty and make longtime users feel more valued.

As was mentioned in the post immediately before yours, Apple does not allow variable pricing of App Store apps, and does not identify the purchasers to the vendor. Omni could provide a discount on purchases through its own store, but that would only help those who bought the iOS version first. Expecting them to mail out discount checks to thousands of customers seems a bit unrealistic, doesn't it? Not sure how much of a discount would be left if they deducted the cost of processing!

When you buy an Omni product soon after its initial release, you are essentially buying a software annuity. Major releases are years apart, and they deliver bug fixes and new features pretty much right until the next major version ships. Your $40 is going to be paying for development of OF for iPad for a long time. That's what makes this long-term customer feel valued—the vendor keeps improving the software and doesn't ask for a handout each time! If you don't see the value in the proposition, you can get a refund if you're within 30 days of purchase: http://www.omnigroup.com/blog/entry/30_day_guarantee/

What sort of discount did you get from Apple on the iPad for your loyalty? :-)

wilsonng

2011-03-20, 01:13 PM

I think Apple is trying to change the way we think about software upgrades here.

Have you ever noticed that every new edition of Mac OS X, iLife, and iWorks never had an upgrade price? Every new edition of Mac OS X, iLife, and iWorks never had an "upgrade" price. We always paid the full price of a new box.

The Mac App store and the iTunes store doesn't offer an upgrade price for their apps either. I don't expect to get an upgrade price for Angry Birds HD or Angry Birds Seasons just because I already have the first Angry Birds.

Omni doesn't have control of the iTunes app store policies. Only Apple has that final authority.

The app stores don't have any mechanism in place that will allow us the capability of getting loyalty rewards.

OmniFocus may not be worth $40 to some folks because they don't really use it. The app is worthless at that point.

My cordless drill would not be worth the $200.00 I paid for it at my local hardware store unless I actually used it.

Some folks are happy with iPhoto because that's all their photo management requirement needs. That's where some of the other competitor's offering can help ala Things, Toodledoo, and a few others.

But some of us need something more. So we upgraded to Aperture with its steep $199 price tag. I got every bit of my $199 back with the amount of time I saved using Aperture.

I also got every penny back from OmniFocus for Mac, iPad, and iPhone.

mbnelson

2011-07-07, 11:07 AM

The Omni Group must be going after a certain clientele. I am a faculty member at a liberal arts college with a family. I have OF for my Mac and my iPod touch (I can't afford cellphone data plans so I have no iPhone). I probably shouldn't have bought both of these given my finances, but I do find them useful.

That said, when colleagues ask me about this cool software I have they initially are interested. Then, when they hear the price, they completely get turned off and think I must be insane.

So I agree with all of those who say the prices are probably cutting Omni Group out of some customers. If I were them, I would hire a business consultant to see if lowering the prices could indeed net enough of a gain in customers to be worth the difference. Many of us could be wrong about that on this forum, but my gut tells me we aren't.

gopi

2011-07-07, 09:44 PM

Hiring a business consultant to figure this out seems like an expensive guess. Looking at the public top grossing productivity list on the App Store, OmniFocus is #10, and Things ($19 cost) is #18. So, their half price competitor grosses less money than they do.

GeoffAirey

2011-07-08, 12:22 AM

I think that yes, it is expensive, but you get what you pay for and OF for Mac and iphone have saved me the $60 (£36 in the UK) many times over.

whpalmer4

2011-07-08, 03:34 PM

There's no question that Omni's products involve an upfront outlay of more monetary units than many of the competing products. In return, you get a product which, if you take full advantage of the feature set, may well be a bargain in terms of value received. You also get excellent support by email, phone, and forum at no additional cost.

Could Omni rake in more revenue by selling more copies at a lower price? Probably. They could probably get more revenue selling crummy Windows software, too. As a privately held company, they are under no obligation to follow the course that delivers the maximum revenue. They've chosen to do what they enjoy, and deliver the best service to their customers that they can. Doubling the number of customers for 10% more revenue isn't really going to make anyone happy. If the current revenue/customer ratio is satisfactory, and the company is growing at a sustainable rate, why change?

Indeed, I think they are trying for a specific clientele, as you posit. The price tag is likely to dissuade casual users (and casual buyers!) and tend to select for those users who are going to be intensive, involved users. Frankly, if you're not an intensive user, there's probably something you can get for under $5 that will be all you need. That's not to say that all OmniFocus users have hundreds of projects and thousands of actions in their databases, because most probably don't. But if you think you might need a tool that could handle that, from what I've seen of the other competitors' products, OmniFocus is probably the right choice. If you have that kind of a workload, a tool that helps you manage it is going to be $40 well spent, and you'll be glad you spent it supporting a substantial company that will be there when you need support.

dosjon

2011-07-15, 06:33 AM

If $40 is a lot you probably don't need Omnifocus for the iPad.

My thoughts exactly. $40 is perfect. Sometimes, price is a feature. It guarentees the folks who make your app can continue to do so.

wilsonng

2011-07-17, 04:28 AM

If you make your life easier by paying $40.00 for OmniFocus for iPad, isn't it worth it? I made a heck of a lot more than $40.00 to more than make up for the cost of the app.

Read this blog posting from James Thompson, the developer for PCalc (Mac version and iOs version) and DragThing for Mac. It's called "Universal Cheapness".

http://www.dragthing.com/blog/2010/08/universal-cheapness/

It perfectly describes people who complains about prices.

I also saw a FaceBook posting on my wall recently. My friend posted a link to an interesting app that was on the iTunes store.

Her comment? "Wished it was free." The price? 99¢....... I just stared at her comment and thought "WTF? She thinks 99¢ is way too expensive?"

If one were to get an iPad, they had to fork out a considerable sum for it. At least $400 to $600? So buying a $40 app shouldn't be something to spill milk over. Yes, I know that we will always hear about "OmniFocus is just too expensive." Then I guess you wouldn't really need OmniFocus if you thought it was too expensive.

There are always other cheaper apps that may or may not do the job for you.....

I am glad that I bought it....... Maybe one way to address the hesitation for potential buyers would be to create an OmniFocus lite with a maximum of X projects and X tasks...... Or a feature subset with repeat date functions or some other useful function deactivated.

If you'd like that, e-mail the Support Ninjas and vote for an OmniFocus lite iOS app.

Apple has crippled the iTunes app store because there is no real way to create a trial demo app short of creating a lite version......

endoftheQ

2011-07-18, 07:09 AM

I have to confess that I'm disappointed that Omni continues to market OmniFocus as a 'To Do' App rather than as a GTD program. It is this, I feel, that contributes to the polarisation as to whether OF is value for money.

The latest screenshots for the iPhone show a shopping list for carrot cake, ▢ buy eggs, etc. and for the iPad, holiday planning, ▢ thingy for Maldives.

I don't believe that OF is the best product for these kind of scenarios. Sure, if you already have it you can shoehorn this kind of stuff in, but as an OF user since its launch, I've long since discovered that shopping, travel etc. are better devolved into other Apps, such as HoneyDo, TravelTracker, etc.

As a mid-range GTD program, OF is good value for money, but at $200+ for the suite and books, alongside a steep learning curve, encouraging people to buy it to plan a carrot cake is IMHO attempting to sell a very expensive sledgehammer to crack some rather small nuts.

GeoffAirey

2011-07-18, 11:25 PM

As a mid-range GTD program, OF is good value for money, but at $200+ for the suite and books, alongside a steep learning curve, encouraging people to buy it to plan a carrot cake is IMHO attempting to sell a very expensive sledgehammer to crack some rather small nuts.

Which is why any sensible person would do some research, read reviews and maybe decide that if they want a simple app, then they probably don't need to spend £24, but a £3 - £5 app may be more appropriate.

I may spend a few quid on a whim, I certainly wouldn't plump down £24 to manage a simple list.

and I use OF to plan holidays along with Evernote. it's the only way to be sure I've got everything done.

Amory

2011-09-14, 08:33 AM

To those who feel victimized by OG here's a primer on capitalism. They have every right to charge anything they want. It's a market place. If you don't want to pay or can't pay, go somewhere else and buy another product that works within your budget.

People can charge what they like, but that does not make it good policy or good business.

It is misleading to characterize, as OG does, the three platforms as independent. Synching between Macs, iPads, and iPhone is built in to most modern applications. What you the consumer buy is a function (organizing one's life by projects and tasks, in OF's case). $140 is a high price for this.

In my case, I own the Mac version and the iPhone version. I'd love to be able to adopt the "set anywhere, ready everywhere" method that is current and helpful in other Mac ecosystem apps. It is disappointing the OG does not adopt this model for its already premium priced products.

whpalmer4

2011-09-14, 12:29 PM

People can charge what they like, but that does not make it good policy or good business.

Perhaps you could explain why it is not good policy or good business? The Omni Group appears to be a growing concern selling quality products to customers around the world. They are confident enough in their offerings to offer a no-questions-asked money-back guarantee, including absorbing Apple's 30% cut for App Store purchases. Their expressed goal is to make the best software they can, not to make the most possible money. If that isn't doing it right, what is?

It is misleading to characterize, as OG does, the three platforms as independent. Synching between Macs, iPads, and iPhone is built in to most modern applications. What you the consumer buy is a function (organizing one's life by projects and tasks, in OF's case). $140 is a high price for this.

How is it misleading? They are independent! Did OmniOutliner for Mac have to change when OmniOutliner for iPad came out? No. OmniGraffle when OmniGraffle for iPad shipped? No. OmniFocus when OmniFocus for iPad? No. Can you use any of those apps without buying any of the others? Yes, and many people do. Do you have to buy all of them? No, only the ones you want (and you can run the iPhone version on the iPad). Is it true that the Mac version of all of those apps is the most powerful? Yes, and it is also true that it runs on more powerful hardware and has been under development for years before 3rd party development for iOS, so this should be no real surprise!

As for the price of the package of all 3 apps, it's peanuts compared to what you would pay to go to a GTD seminar. It comes with excellent, essentially unlimited free support by email and phone, whereas you could spend almost the entire purchase price with just 3 calls to Apple's support if not under warranty ($29 for iOS/AppleTV, $49 for Mac/consumer apps). No attempt is made to tie each purchase to a specific computer, like Adobe is fond of doing, and upgrade pricing is very reasonable (and allows you to skip versions at no penalty, again unlike many other high-priced vendors). As for the wisdom of charging for each additional component, each one is a separate development with a hefty investment of effort by people both inside and out of Omni. 1Password is a good example of another successful company offering its products on multiple platforms to work together; to use your characterization, their function is password management, and the price you pay depends on how many platforms you need. Or should I feel that they owe me a free copy of their Windows app because I own the Mac, iPad and iPhone apps?

Let's look at some of Omni's competition in the productivity space:

Things: $50 Mac, $20 iPad, $10 iPhone, no bundling, not as powerful
The Hit List: $50 Mac, $10 iPhone, iPad app in development, sync by subscription charge
DevonThink: $50 (or more) Mac, $15 iPad/iPhone, universal app, but terrible reviews
Yojimbo: $39 Mac, $10 iPad, crippled mobile product, only local sync
Evernote: free apps, subscription charge, data has to go through their server

If your beef is that they don't offer a discounted bundle, you've got Apple to blame for that. If you buy software directly from Omni, you get a sliding scale discount that goes up with the number of apps you buy. There's no practical way at the moment to do that through Apple's stores.

Finally, it doesn't take much for an organizer to save you $140. Missing bill payments, failing to meet a client obligation, inefficient trip planning are all examples of activities where sub-optimal execution could lead to substantially higher costs. Anyone who bills for their time will recoup the cost rapidly if it makes them use their time more efficiently.

In my case, I own the Mac version and the iPhone version. I'd love to be able to adopt the "set anywhere, ready everywhere" method that is current and helpful in other Mac ecosystem apps. It is disappointing the OG does not adopt this model for its already premium priced products.
Example? Perhaps I just don't understand your terminology.

Christian

2011-09-14, 01:07 PM

I do mot quite understand the issue. As it has already been said, OmniGroup is a company. And as most other companies it has to survive on the free market on which we all buy our products at the price we are willing to pay. Only case where that does not apply is with monopolist companies. Now I like OmniGroup a lot for the way they operate and I like most of their products but they are far from monopolists in the field of "simple to do/list making apps" (see whpalmer's list of competition above). If you need a simple app that helps you to manage simple lists and feel that spending what they ask for OmniFocus is not worth it for your needs, do not buy OmniFocus. It is really as simple as that: buy what you need at the price you can and want to afford. If you can not afford a certain price you will have to buy something that you can afford instead, even if that's not the beste product out on the market.

Compare it to cars if you like. If you only need transportation from A to a close B on a daily basis, any old Toyota will do. If you have the money and feel it's worth it for you personally, sure, buy a brand new BMW. Is the BMW the better car? Yes, likely. Does it offer more features? Yes. More comfort of use? Yes. Better support by the vendor? Most likely. Does it cost more? Yes, of course, because it is the better product, more desirable for most peope and hence comes with a higher price tag on the free market (simplified). Don't got the budget? Got the budget but think your money is better invested elsewhere and you actually only need a cheap Toyota for your way? Buy the cheap alternative. There is really not much more to say about it.

From my experience OmniGroup presents itself in a quality way as a producer and vendor. The fact that they are transparent about their work and that they do not act like Microsoft or Adobe should not mislead anybody in the way that that's for granted. Neither do I think that the fact that this is the IT branch should mislead in the way that anybody s entitled to anything but the product and service advertised in exchange for the payment mutually agreed upon before you hit the "buy" button. Anything else - and in this case I see a lot of "else", personally - is extra service and I'm glad I get it. If you are arguing that you want the software but can not afford it then I am actually truly sorry for you (honestly) because it's a really good software. But, that's the market. And those people need to pay bills too and want to have something left at the end of the month for their good job. If, however, you are arguing that you want the software and could theoretically affording but do not want to because you feel it's too expensive then you have already executed your powers as the customer, by not buying the product. If enough people feel like you, Omni will change their policy or vanish from the market (since no money would come in). If you are part of a minority then Omni will continue to sell good products at a price seen reasonably by them and the consumers. In the former case, as said, sorry. In the later case, you took a decision you are likely happy with, otherwise you wouldn't stand by it. Either way, that's how it is...

Greg Jones

2011-09-15, 01:59 AM

Let's look at some of Omni's competition in the productivity space:...

DevonThink: $50 (or more) Mac, $15 iPad/iPhone, universal app, but terrible reviews

I realize that the topic is about competitive product value, rather than competitive product features. Having said that, I would not consider DEVONthink to be a competitor to OmniFocus at all. The two products are highly complementary, as should be evident by the integration scripts included with DEVONthink and the fine scripts posted here and on the DEVON forum by other DEVONthink/OmniFocus users. DEVONthink would be a poor substitute for all that OmniFocus does, just as OmniFocus would be a poor substitute for all that DEVONthink does.

If one were to consider DEVONthink as an alternative to OmniFocus, then the logical choice would be the DEVONthink Pro version, which is the same price as OmniFocus. The higher price (by $70) DEVONthink Pro Office version includes OCR and advanced email archiving support. There is also a personal edition which is $30 less than either OmniFocus or DEVONthink Pro.

whpalmer4

2011-09-15, 04:38 AM

Yeah, that was a poor choice of words, software that handles a large clump of data accessible from multiple devices was the underlying idea I had in mind. Didn't mean to suggest that DT would be a good task manager...

gopi

2011-09-20, 06:11 PM

People can charge what they like, but that does not make it good policy or good business.

OmniFocus for iPad has been consistently listed as higher grossing than Things when you look at the App Store list. That makes me think they must be doing something well.

It is misleading to characterize, as OG does, the three platforms as independent. Synching between Macs, iPads, and iPhone is built in to most modern applications. What you the consumer buy is a function (organizing one's life by projects and tasks, in OF's case). $140 is a high price for this.

In my case, I own the Mac version and the iPhone version. I'd love to be able to adopt the "set anywhere, ready everywhere" method that is current and helpful in other Mac ecosystem apps. It is disappointing the OG does not adopt this model for its already premium priced products.

OG characterizes the *software development* and *costs* of the platforms as separate. Many parts of the app are quite different and quite expensive. Huge amounts of time have been spent that are specific to the app on each different platform.

I assume what you are proposing is that OmniGroup lower the prices for people who already own the app on another platform, yes?

Given that a significant majority of customers who buy the iOS app already have the desktop one, what you're proposing in effect is a significant price reduction. All the theoretical discussion about bundling theories etc. sidesteps what you're asking for: lower prices for the majority of iOS customers.

The way I see it, everybody gets the bundle price right now. Those who buy only the iOS apps are getting the bundle price as a bonus. Don't forget that OmniGroup can't actually sell the iOS apps at different prices to prior customers. One price for everybody in the App Store™.

Tedallen

2011-09-21, 05:40 AM

Given that a significant majority of customers who buy the iOS app already have the desktop one,

I wonder if that is true and if it will continue to be true in the future.

I don't have a Mac and therefore don't have OF for the Mac. I do have both IOS versions. I object to what seems to be a common idea that OF for iPad is some kind of accessory to the mac version. For me it is the GTD tool that I use. There are short comings that I hope will be addressed in the future, preferably sooner rather than later, but I do not consider syncing to the desktop to be of value. And I really would like to see more development directed to the iPad.

As to pricing. It's relative. I spend more on coffee in a week than I did on either version of OF that I have. For example, which would be more valuable to you: All 3 OF versions or Adobe Acrobat Pro. My guess, for most people, is the OG products, but they are, combined, less expensive.

bklynctrain

2011-10-01, 01:28 PM

I agree! Is there any way you can make a free trial available for Mac, iPad, and/or iPhone?? I have heard great things about OmniFocus, and being that I am a graduate student, this app can be very useful. However, I am on a tight budget and I cannot simply spend $40/$80 on an app that I have never tried. I think a free/inexpensive app, even if just for a 3-day trial, could be extremely useful for me and others who are weary of spending this much money without ever having tried the product. This would be greatly appreciated!

whpalmer4

2011-10-01, 03:43 PM

grdt stdnt ght t b gd t dng bt f rsrch nw nd thn. That might involve checking the Omni website for details on their 14-day trials for the Mac software, and the 30 day guarantee on any purchases from them. Check the Omni Mouth for a description of the guarantee as it applies to purchases from the App Store.

avacake

2011-10-01, 10:24 PM

The older I get, the more often I find myself awake at 3 a.m., wondering if I finished everything that needed get done the previous day and running through tasks for the day ahead. For the past few months, I’ve been relying on The Omni Group’s OmniFocus on my Macs as well as OmniFocus for iPhone to help keep my life in order and sleep a bit more soundly. The newest member of the suite, OmniFocus for iPad, complements the other OmniFocus apps, leveraging the iPad’s larger display nicely. If you’re willing to learn how OmniFocus works, it’s worth the investment in money and time.

endoftheQ

2011-10-02, 08:42 AM

I have to confess that in the last year I can't remember recommending OmniFocus, firstly because of the price point and secondly the learning curve. Don't get me wrong, if someone asked about GTD or I believed that was what they 'needed' or even 'wanted', I'd tell them to to read the DA and KD books and then give OF a thorough try-out.

However, having used OF since launch, I find I'm using it less-and-less. I've a folder on my iDevices labelled GTD containing a high-end program, a mid-end one (OF) and four cheapo Apps, and (to my own surprise!) it's those four where I spend most of my GTD time. It's a very different scenario from the early days, when I was an OmniFocus Advocate of the First Order.

Yes, I believe OF is a fantastic GTD system, but I've discovered I'm rapidly devolving (stop laughing whpalmer4!) away from it as other offerings offer a much more compelling and efficient experience.

I'm also disappointed that some basic features, that would take Mr. Case (IMHO!) a couple of hours to code (whilst chowing a California Roll, swigging a Sapporo and keeping one eye on The Big Bang Theory!), fail to materialise year-after-year.

It's sad, really.

Christian

2011-10-02, 10:22 PM

That interests me. Could you by chance elaborate on which features you are referring to, exactly? And, could you describe how those "low end apps" offer a much more compelling and efficient experience? What could be improved around OF?

Third off, may I ask which app is the "high-end" one? Plase tell me you are not saying tinkerings is more high-end than OF ;p

DrJJWMac

2011-10-03, 06:59 AM

Tight budget aside ... how much money can you save to streamline the time you spend now not doing what you could have been doing in the first place? If you know you need it, then ...

Project: GTD Application
-- research viable applications
-- download trial options
-- test-run trial options
-- determine prices
-- establish budget priorities
-- decide go/no-go on each purchase option
-- purchase appropriate application(s)

You have an A for this step in the assignment .... :-)

--
JJW

carlsson

2011-10-10, 12:23 AM

Fwiw, I agree with ssh that it feels awkward to pay for another version. And why is the iPad version more expensive than the iPhone version?

The most professional approach would have been to make the app both iPad and iPhone compatible.

I understand that it cost money to develop different versions, and OF is a great product, so I shouldn't complain. OF *is* worth the money. But it's awkward anyway...

/$0.02

Christian

2011-10-10, 06:00 AM

Issue with that is that making the app universal does neither reduce the development cost for both apps nor does it change the financial calculations of OG. Simply put they need to make a certain amount of money to cover costs and invest, usually plus some reserves. "Costs" includes that all the fine people working there want to make decent money for their living.

That means that if they would now merge the apps for iPad and iPhone they would sell less apps and hence would have to adjust price to still meet their quota (that is under the premise that there are people using both the iPhone and iPad version, otherwise it would be less relevant).
Would you be willing to pay 60 bucks for a version working on both your devices insted of 30 plus 40 (or how much it actually is)?

whpalmer4

2011-10-10, 07:28 PM

There's another downside to having a combined iPad/iPhone app. Omni seems to work on the apps in a cycle, at times. A new feature appears in one version, then another, with each revision taking advantage of lessons learned on the other platform(s). Would iPad users be better off if Omni had delayed Forecast view for the iPad until they had an implementation for the iPhone (never mind the Mac, which apparently isn't going to get it until 2012 at the earliest)? I think the answer there is pretty clearly "no"! There's clearly common code between the iPad and iPhone versions, but much of the difference between the two appears to be UI code which isn't shared, and quite a bit of the development work in the latest builds appears to be UI code, judging from a quick glance at the release notes. None of the Universal apps that I use seem to roll out new features for just one of the platforms at a time. So, with a Universal app, not only do you have to pay Omni to develop for and support a platform you don't use, you may have to wait for Omni to write code for it, too! Then to add insult to injury, you end up with an app that has a bigger footprint.

I use all three versions of OmniFocus, and I've never thought that I would have been better served had they built a Universal app. Now, if they had neither an iPad nor an iPhone app, I think a somewhat stronger case could be made for building a Universal app (though the issues above still may apply). Somehow, though, I don't expect to see a Universal app for OmniPlan on iOS, and that's the only one left with no iOS app whatsoever...