[briankc]

Originally Posted by Anjan_bagchee@urmc.roches

When you pay a relatively high price of $80, you expect that the developers will be honorable and provide the iPhone application at a less greedy price.

Actually when I paid the $80 (well worth it to me) I did not do so with any expectation about any iPhone version or its pricing. I paid the $80 for an excellent application with solid engineering talent behind it, great support, and any updates until the 2.0 release.

Omni developers are the not the only ones that need money. If excellent GTD apps like Things (http://culturedcode.com/things/) can cost $50 for both desktop and iPhone apps, then how come Omni can charge twice as much?

Then why don't you go and buy Things? Presumably you're here complaining because OmniFocus provides value to you that Things doesn't. If that's not the case, why are you here? If it is the case, then you've answered your own question. Omni can charge twice as much because people feel it's worth that price. I certainly do.

For those feeling intelligent by saying that you don't need to subsidize iPhone users, how come you are paying four times as much as Ghost Action (http://ghostparksoftware.com/) for the exact functionality PLUS synchronization (not with iphone yet, but with other PDAs and .mac)?

Ghost Action isn't useful to me. OmniFocus is.

Its true that the market will decide what's a "fair price" but I think I'll put my weight behind Things because not only does it work much better but has a much cleaner, simpler UI. Keep feeling happy about the $100 that Omni deserves, maybe even donate them some. Its asinine not to support another company with a equal or arguably better software for $50, including their iphone application.

That Things is "equal or arguably better" is a completely subjective opinion and one I disagree with. Furthermore, I am unsure why you even care that some of us think OmniFocus is worth the price.

I was testing this software for over 2000 Mac users (with many of them using iPhones). Guess who we will approach for an enterprise license? At that scale, I'm paying half with Things compared to "they need bread on the table" Omni developers. Honestly, I'm disappointed because Omni has always been fair on pricing.

There's nothing unfair about $20 for this app.

[ABITAR]

I am happy to pay twenty dollars. This is a good app. These guys aren't microsoft. It's like buying organic food. You pay a little more, and get a lot more quality. It's worth it. Stop complaining about the price.

[Anjan]

Originally Posted by briankc

Then why don't you go and buy Things? Presumably you're here complaining because OmniFocus provides value to you that Things doesn't. If that's not the case, why are you here? If it is the case, then you've answered your own question. Omni can charge twice as much because people feel it's worth that price. I certainly do.

Bravo Briankc! You have achieved cognitive confusion! 'Things' is still in beta and not being sold. And product testing involves a lot of things but not consulting or approval from Briankc. I have a feeling you have not tried either Ghost Action or Things and just felt like hitting the Quote button to spew incoherence.

If you think that users should only enter these forums to post love letters to Omni and no constructive criticism of where there product is failing, then you have certain issues to talk to your psychiatrist about. Why would you even respond when you could not state ONE advantage that OmniFocus has over the two similar products I listed?

I reviewed OmniFocus and posted where its severely flawed and you are suggesting I take the alternative I suggested? Like I won't figure that out myself because I took the time to post the information here so logical people (obviously excludes you :p) can draw conclusions. Please hit the donate button on your way out to overpay for software :D

[briankc]

Congratulations, you're a troll.

[Ken Case]

Anjan, did you note that Things is also charging $19.99 for their iPhone app (which currently doesn't synchronize with their desktop app, unlike OmniFocus)? I think $19.99 is a very reasonable price for an iPhone productivity app, certainly much less expensive than apps in the same space on the BlackBerry or Palm or Windows Mobile platforms. (The average price of the top five best selling BlackBerry To Do applications is over $35.)

[FrostedMac]

Omni has made $8500 (what they take home) thus far on OmniFocus for iPhone. Congrats. I'm sure it will be even bigger tomorrow. Will you invite me over for dinner?

[Brian]

Merged pricing-related threads so we don't have to cross-post responses.

[FrostedMac]

Evernote is crap. I uninstalled their desktop version faster than cat running after a mouse.

[pjb]

So for $20 I can get the same great functionality (on a tiny screen) that I can have on the desktop for $80*? Seems like a bargain for the iPhone buyer. If I buy both apps, syncing is "free"**.

*so glad I personally did not pay the full price for the desktop version
**excluding any webdav/mobileme/home-set-up-hair-pulling costs

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by Anjan_bagchee@urmc.roches

When you pay a relatively high price of $80, you expect that the developers will be honorable and provide the iPhone application at a less greedy price. Omni developers are the not the only ones that need money. If excellent GTD apps like Things (http://culturedcode.com/things/) can cost $50 for both desktop and iPhone apps, then how come Omni can charge twice as much?

My purchase decisions really don't factor in the need of the developers for money, except insofar as they have set their price accordingly. If the application has the feature set I want, the stability level I need, and the price is one I'm willing to pay in exchange for those things, money changes hands and everyone is happy. If I fail to do my evaluation properly and discover after exchanging money for software that it doesn't have the feature set I wanted or the stability I needed, at least one party will be unhappy. Where the blame should be apportioned will depend on a number of factors, but with Omni's "try before you buy" policy and the lack of published promises that such and such a feature will be present in 1.0 (but wasn't) I think it hard to pin a rap on Omni.

I'm curious; what is the pricing structure for the applications you build and sell? It's easy to make demands of others when no one is holding you to the same standard.

Omni can charge what it does because there is a sizeable population of customers who feel that what they get is a fair exchange for what they pay. It's as simple as that. If you don't feel you get sufficient value for the price premium, by all means, buy something else!

For those feeling intelligent by saying that you don't need to subsidize iPhone users, how come you are paying four times as much as Ghost Action (http://ghostparksoftware.com/) for the exact functionality PLUS synchronization (not with iphone yet, but with other PDAs and .mac)?

Wow, talk about comparing apples and motorcycles! My point was that OmniFocus for the iPhone is a whole new application, and giving it away for free to everyone who purchases the desktop version equates to selling a copy of it to those who don't need or want it (not broken in the bill, of course).

As for GhostPark's product, just a few things to suggest that it isn't "the exact functionality":

Originally Posted by GhostAction's FAQ

Will Ghost Action support feature X in a future version?

Some of the planned features are repeatable actions, printing of a subset of your actions, different printing layouts, bigger notes field, formatted text in the notes field, start dates, search, quicksilver integration, improved tabbing between fields, optional @-symbol when syncing, syncing only specified contexts, optional project name in to-do when syncing, improved action filtering, saving of sort orders, separation of next actions from future action, attachments, undo, better date formatting, backup/restore to file and more.

I see a dozen features in there that I currently use with OmniFocus. Why would I want to take a giant step backward? And I find it hard to believe that someone calling the shots on a 2000 seat installation is going to go with a one-man software shop.

Its true that the market will decide what's a "fair price" but I think I'll put my weight behind Things because not only does it work much better but has a much cleaner, simpler UI. Keep feeling happy about the $100 that Omni deserves, maybe even donate them some. Its asinine not to support another company with a equal or arguably better software for $50, including their iphone application.

I think "arguably" is a key word in your assertion there. Again, I look at the "future improvements" section of the Things website, and I see a bunch of stuff Omni has been shipping for months as a released product.

Very few of us are under an obligation to buy the product with the lowest up front price tag. Dealing with a vendor that sells something too cheaply so they can get the deal is rarely a ticket to long-term satisfaction for either party.

I was testing this software for over 2000 Mac users (with many of them using iPhones). Guess who we will approach for an enterprise license? At that scale, I'm paying half with Things compared to "they need bread on the table" Omni developers. Honestly, I'm disappointed because Omni has always been fair on pricing.

Hard to see how they have been unfair on pricing. You didn't buy thousands of copies of OmniFocus on a promise that you would have a free iPhone application, did you? If the other software is cheaper and you like it better, why do you care what Omni charges? This sounds just like the kids who complain how Apple charges too much for a Macbook Pro when they were able to buy this "superior" Dell laptop for less.

I'm confident that if you have a legitimate proposal to roll out 2000 (or even 200) seats of OmniFocus, Omni would be very willing to discuss volume pricing. I have to say this discussion is a novel experience for me; my experience is that the people calling the shots on major installations don't spend their time bickering over the price on user forums.