[Dogsbreath]

And I have gone from NO to maybe.

[RiK]

Personally I don't think OF is 'expensive', in fact I'd say that it represents great value for money.

I charge up to £100 ($200) an hour for my time, and my clients pay it because they value my expertise. So, an hour when I can be out earning is very valuable to me. I'm more than happy to pay Omni for Omnifocus as it saves me HOURS of potentially wasted time every week.

On top of that, I've rarely come across other companies who are as open and responsive to their customers as Omni group and I'm happy to pay a sensible price to allow them to maintain that relationship with their customers.

Would you rather they cut corners, rushed things out and then couldn't back that up with support later?

[braver]

OF looks just like OO. It clearly is a version of OO, so if I own OO Pro which I've got recently to do GTD, it feels like an unnecessary and steep upgrade price.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by braver

OF looks just like OO. It clearly is a version of OO, so if I own OO Pro which I've got recently to do GTD, it feels like an unnecessary and steep upgrade price.

That's a bold statement from someone who hasn't seen the source code. Just because there are cosmetic similarities doesn't mean they're the same. In fact, if my memory is correct, Omni has stated that there are fewer similarities than one might think.

[frankly]

Originally Posted by braver

OF looks just like OO. It clearly is a version of OO, so if I own OO Pro which I've got recently to do GTD, it feels like an unnecessary and steep upgrade price.

As someone that has used OO for a long time and has been using OF for a week I can say that this is a completely inaccurate and uninformed statement. They are not even close in the way that they operate. Can you format an OO window to look similar to an OF window? Yes. This has NOTHING to do with how the program actually works when you start entering data and working with your tasks. They are like night and day in this regard.

[BwanaZulia]

Originally Posted by braver

OF looks just like OO. It clearly is a version of OO, so if I own OO Pro which I've got recently to do GTD, it feels like an unnecessary and steep upgrade price.

Yeah, I think you need to spend time with both products a little more. While they share some commonalities (as do all OmniGroup products) they end up being pretty different.

BZ

[HowardP]

I recently purchased OF and am very happy with the ease and utility in putting GTD to use. I am sure a lot of work went into this fine application and whether it looks similar to other OMNI apps is not an issue. The point is that the program does just what it is intended to, and, the support on this website is amazing. OF is well worth the $80 I paid. For those who believe it is overpriced, check out other software (e.g. David Allen's) and then tell me that OF is too expensive. If you really think it is not worth, what to me seems like a perfectly reasonable price point, then don't buy it.
I am a songwriter and musician, my songs are licensed by ASCAP and copyrighted. The analogy here is the same as people who don't want to pay for music feeling that they should be able to get it for free. They don't see all the work that goes into creating a song, publishing etc. Just as I as a writer am entitled to get paid for my product (song) so should OMNI for their product (OF). Also, as much as I love songwriting - am I not supposed to make a living creating music? My point is that writing is a business and a business exists to make money. If songwriters could not earn a living there would be no music, then what tune would you be singing?
OMNI clearly states that they are a business. If they could not earn a living by producing excellent apps for us MAC users, then what software would you be using?
Sorry, for the rant, but this is a major issue in the music industry and the parallels to the complaints here are just to close to home for me. I will always pay for music I want and I will always pay for software I use.

[frankly]

Wow, what a terrible analogy. I don't think I read anyone in here asking Omni to give away OmniFocus for free.

[HowardP]

Originally Posted by frankly

Wow, what a terrible analogy. I don't think I read anyone in here asking Omni to give away OmniFocus for free.

I never said that anyone asked for OF for free. Maybe my analogy was not the best. It might have been better had I mentioned all the people who complain about paying 99 cents for a song track as being overpriced and who think we should be charging only 49 cents (I'd be broke). Anyway, I hope my point was understood.

[Toadling]

Originally Posted by HowardP

I never said that anyone asked for OF for free. Maybe my analogy was not the best. It might have been better had I mentioned all the people who complain about paying 99 cents for a song track as being overpriced and who think we should be charging only 49 cents (I'd be broke). Anyway, I hope my point was understood.

HowardP's analogy may not be perfect, but it still gets the point across: developing software (like writing music) is difficult and requires a lot of hard work. But because there is no physical product involved, and many consumers fail to understand the costs involved, the monetary value is often deflated.

Assigning value to intellectual or virtual products is a difficult thing. I know people who would never steal a 50-cent piece of fruit but have no problem sharing music they didn't pay for. Likewise, I know other who are willing to pay over $100 for a pair of shoes worn only a few times a year, yet balk at the idea of paying for a software package that they use everyday. On top of that, they own 3,500 square foot houses and multiple cars, so it's clearly not a matter of affording the software.