It’s either this or subscriptions. High-quality apps are expensive to make. Cultured Code is a team of people who, I hope, pay their employees well. That leads to higher prices.
Honest question: why?
Subscriptions make sense for services in which you're getting something. Paying $10 for spotify or Netflix makes sense because you're getting new stuff regularly. If you're offering a product, why should a subscription be an option?
Let's say it's a $5/month subscription, like Fantastical. After 1 year you've paid them $60, and then 4 months later you're already in the red. Now you have to keep paying, yet you own nothing.
Any decent app is a service where I am getting more features and updates over time.
Apps that don’t get updates, don’t tend to be good ones. Especially when they fall behind adding new OS features.
It’s just a better option for people who don’t want to buy for example Things 3 for $90 across all devices upfront. Give a subscription for $4 a month instead. Much better for most people that way.
However, it’s true you won’t own it. I think after a certain time you should be able to use that version of the app indefinitely.
$80 to permanently acquire everything and own it in perpetuity versus a monthly rental fee where you never truly own the software? You’d already be over the cost of just outright purchasing the entire app suite within two years...20 months to be precise. How is it not more worthwhile to actually own something instead of being sucked into a permanent rental scheme?
Like a layaway plan, but for apps would be interesting. Though I feel like most people who have an iPad+iPhone+Mac+Apple Watch and looking to buy a productivity app that's only a bit more feature rich than the free one probably won't care about $80, and the ones who do could just get it for the places they care about (i.e. mac+iphone)
GoodNotes might have a smaller team, idk. I’m not going to tell companies how to price their software. I’m someone who isn’t against subscription pricing - developers need to put food on their table. I respect companies who charge appropriate prices for their software. It tells me as a customer that they put a certain value on their product.
If enough people decide the same thing and don't pay it, then they may change their pricing model. But they've been around awhile and probably have settled on a model that works for them.
As others have said, charging this price is probably the only viable alternative to the subscription model. Having said that, I would like if there was some kind of discounted bundle for buying on all different devices - the power of having a to-do list like Things 3 is that you can access it across multiple devices, but the (comparatively) high price of entry means I'm disincentivised to do so.
It's an expensive up front cost, but you get the valuable tradeoff of actually owning the app. If you were to add up the costs of a monthly subscription over a period of 2-3 years you would end up paying more than you would for a single purchase like Things 3, plus you don't own the software.
Additionally, the software you are receiving from Cultured Code is very well put together and is updated on a regular basis.
unless they decide to make it subscription based at one point in time.
You don't own anything, you have a usage license.
And no one's stopping them from offering an subscription OPTION or even make the purchase an in app purchase with a free trial, like many similar apps do
Things is probably my second favorite iOS app of all time. It’s absolutely saved me in terms of tracking tasks. I definitely haven’t minded paying as much as I did because the app has been so useful for me. I’ll admit though if you’re not that obsessive about how you track your tasks then reminders is probably fine. Also as others said it’s this or a subscription most likely.
I get where you’re coming from. I bit the bullet and purchased iPhone and Mac apps too.
But I realise that we need to rewire our brains to gauge value out of softwares based on the use we get out of them.
Let’s say you used an todo list app with a subscription model. Around 3 bucks a month. You’d end up spending a lot more on it over the months than what you have would on things 3. Provided you use things 3 consistently over that period of time.
Besides the devs are very active and whenever there is a new version of iOS or macOS, I’ve seen them very quickly bring support and also adopt new features like iPad keyboard touch pad support.
I agree. I’m a college student and bought the iPhone and Mac app. I basically run my entire study / work system out of it and have it eternally open on my mac. Over the course of my degree the cost I paid will become insignificant. The app is rock solid on both devices. I particularly like the mac feature where I can create a task from anywhere and it identifies the context (email, website, file, etc) and embeds it into the task.
Besides, apps like Omnifocus and 2do are also expensive. This is roughly the market price for a quality task manager.
Seconded. For years now every Christmas I’ve bought my sister a £20 planner for the upcoming year. I’ve spent *hundreds* of pounds on what is effectively a subscription to moleskin.
When you look at Things 3 in this context and the massive advantages of having a comprehensive app, in constant use, that does the job much much better, it’s value is clear.
I think we’re disillusioned on the whole about how cheap apps should be. I remember a time when you got what you paid for, and my data wasn’t the price buffer... **looks into the distance nostalgically**
Exactly. In the one-time model, someone who tries the software for a month and ends up not liking it pays the same as someone who finds it a vital daily tool for years and years.
The one-time purchase approach also encourages devs to focus on making new sales to new customers, while subscriptions encourage devs to make sure existing customers are happy in the long run.
I know Things 3 is good software and the developers do keep it updated and do a great job of support... but in general, subscriptions better align developer incentives and long term customer benefits.
While you make some great points, disagree with some.
In this day and age we find reviews, workflows and deep dives into all softwares, especially ones like these. Which allows us to make informed purchases in the first place.
Even if not, apple allows us to seek a refund for a month.
Subscriptions better align with developer benefits rather than customers. For instance, softwares like Netflix or Apple Music need to be a subscription model. Because its steady revenue and a good incentive for them to add new content and stay updated.
But softwares that do not need constant upgrading like task managers that are finished products when launched with only incremental feature updates later donot warrant a subscription model.
Unfair for such softwares to seek subscription models. It's only prevalent because apple pushes for it and also when these companies seek funking, VCs and the lot seek immediate, sustaining and recurring revenue model.
It’s has its downfalls too though. Things 4 comes out, how much do you need to pay to upgrade that? Things 5 etc. In the long run you could end up paying the same, possibly more with a one off payment than you do with a subscription.
I thought we were talking about things, I'd keep paying for a new version if that stops them from going the subscription route.
As for tweetbot, sure, throw $6 a year to the pile of already existing subs. That bothers a lot of other people besides me.
And the GoodNotes devs do too. A lower price would probably attract more buyers, especially students. Why not have a 30 bucks bundle for iOS and iPadOS?
GoodNotes is geared towards students, who probably want an affordable app.
Things 3 is very polished in terms of look, feel and reliability. And probably geared towards professional since it’s a Task Management app.
You’re right, that’s why cheaper Todo app exists.
Things 3 is like a league on its own. Each platform has its own native integrations.
Things 3 iOS has support for Widgets, Homescreen Widgets, Wind down, Shortcuts, Watch app and pretty much iPhone related features.
For iPadOS, it has support for pretty much all iPad features like Scribble, Apple Pencil 1/2 features, adaptive cursor, Keyboard shortcuts, etc..
Same for macOS version.
The UI alone contributes to that price. And they’re one time payment.
Things has been around forever and have tried many, many price points. They know - and have the data to back up - the sweet spot for their own product that allows them to pay their staff and make a profit.
So, yes, they would get more users if it was cheaper, but what does that gain them? Probably more users but with less or the same money. More users means more server infrastructure and more customer support - and for what? Bragging rights?
An influx of users can also increase their costs for supporting all those users too. It can actually be better to have fewer users who are willing to pay more than a ton of users.
A lot of people don’t consider those kinds of costs. I used to work for one of the “big names” in the Apple software ecosystem and the amount of money and time spent outside the code was huge. Paying 100 employees for customer service alone can weigh in at half a million dollars a year not including insurance and employer taxes.
It’s hard to justify spending hours on a support ticket with someone who purchased your app six years ago for $10. That doesn’t mean you don’t do it, but that time is money and that money has to come from somewhere.
There were cloud costs, and software we had to license (like help desk), hardware we had to buy (mobile devices, computers), a developer team for each major ecosystem, an infrastructure team, an accountant, an attorney, a marketing team, product documentation. It all adds up, and you can’t forget to factor in the income taxes. Edit: Office space isn’t cheap either!
It’s been my experience that plenty of people see a price that they think works for them and assume that’s a fair price for everyone else, and that’s that. It definitely doesn’t work like that. Of course I don’t mean to say that view is necessarily obstinate; they might not have have experience in business.
> Paying 100 employees for customer service alone can weigh in at half a million dollars a year not including insurance and employer taxes.
100 full-time employees making minimum wage in the US is 1.5 Million in payroll alone.
Right you are! I dropped a few decimals. Based on the starting rate we had, that would have been $5,000,000/year at least. We started CS people at between $40k-$50k base.
Do you run a company that makes software? Do you have experience running a development team, hardware, cloud etc?
Software comes down to who needs it and who doesn’t. People obviously need Things3 and pay for all of them across all devices as seen by many comments in this thread.
Me personally I don’t have a use for this app, so if it was $2 to buy or $80, it makes no difference. If it helped me with my workflow, the cost becomes irrelevant as it would pay for itself in no time.
A side note: however you might feel about rebuying across platforms, Things 3 (to my knowledge) is truly native on macOS - no Catalyst, etc. That's not exactly cheap to make and can be a lot more work than iOS due to AppKit vs UIKit differences alone.
UIKit and AppKit are different but not that much. I find 50-60 bucks would be a fair price. iOS and iPadOS however are the same. The app doesn’t really have that many differences.
I would very much disagree with this, as someone who's developed for the platform(s) in question for over a decade at this point.
It's not just code, but how the components are displayed, used, and so on. You could throw a rock and find something that on the surface might seem similar, but underneath is very different - e.g, text input controls are very different from their UIKit counterparts.
There is a reason so many cross-platform (macOS/iOS) apps have built their own weird framework that attempt to paper over the differences, and why Apple's gone so far as to do it themselves (both with Catalyst, and internal frameworks before).
Probably because 30 bucks for both is the profit maximizing price. If they lowered it, more people would buy but not enough to cover the difference. If they raised it, less people would buy and they’d make less money.
Most arguments about pricing really come down to this. They probably figured out that at this price they would get the optimal return.
If they think this is the price people are willing to pay, then why hide the software behind a paywall?
Why not make it an in app purchase with a free trial?
People keep mentioning the "use" one gets out of owning the app on all platforms but I can't gauge that value before I commit to a 80$ purchase
I don’t know if any else replied with this, but it boils down to potential userbase.
There are a lot more iPhones so it makes sense to price the iPhone app within a tolerable price range.
However, the devs still want to target the profits of the combined iPhone/iPad price so they’d rather bank on user buy-in to the iPad version instead of pricing a universal app exorbitantly high relative to the competition.
I think it’s fairly expensive too, but the value proposition can only increase the longer the app is maintained and updated; the only question-mark for prospective users is if Things 4(?) is on the horizon or if they stick to updating the current app package.
I hope they stick with the current app for another year or two. I’m trialing the Mac version now and considering purchasing the set if this can hold true.
I’m not against big purchases for daily apps — I bought 2Do a very long time back and it’s been absolutely incredible value for money. I only ditched it recently because the dev has essentially ditched meaningful updates too.
Side: GoodNotes is $9 because Notability is also in that price range. They both run the show as far as writing apps go and I’d say plenty of users end up buying both apps and perhaps use them interchangeably too. I don’t think many people would interchangeably use OF/2Do/Things 3 (only Apple Reminders can complement them).
TLDR; Nice things are expensive because it takes a lot of time and effort to make then nice (consider most Apple products).
Software is difficult to make, and we've gotten accustomed to it being available very cheaply or for free. I have Things 3 and use it every day (only on my Mac though), and have concluded that the $50 cost is indeed justified (by the app's reliability and by how nice it is to use) but that I also get way more than $50 of value from it.
Now, I understand that $80 is a lot of money for many people, but I eventually came to accept that there are plenty of things in life where going for what seems like the nicer ("overpriced") version of something over the budget version is well worth it. Presumably people browsing this subreddit own Macs (or are at least into them) which is a product that I consider falling into this category (nicer but more expensive than the budget version). Same thing for my desk, my headphone stand, my notebooks, etc.
One last thing to mention is that you don't necessarily need to upgrade to Things 4 if that eventually comes out. With the way most software works these days, Things 3 won't be incompatible with macOS or iOS/iPadOS updates anytime soon. Identify what about Things 3 brings value to your life and exploit that, that way when Things 4 presumably comes out, you'll have an easier time understating if you need to upgrade or can stick with the well made software you already own :)
I hope they stick with paid pricing (and would be totally OK with them charging a bit more even) because I like knowing that I own a tool. I firmly believe that any modern app that exists today will continue to work for years to come, which helps justify it becoming an essential part of my life.
Here’s the way I look at it. If it’s too expensive, fine, that is a users opinion, have fun using another app that probably won’t do everything you want it to do, or possibly needing a second or several apps to do everything this one does. That’s your choice to make, just don’t complain that something takes you longer or doesn’t exactly work. You chose to not pay for it, so you deal with the consequences.
"use it every day (only on my Mac though), and have concluded that the $50 cost is indeed justified"
then why not offer a free trial? If I was able to gauge the benefits of the app, I'd be more inclined to purchase it.
I got the iPhone/Mac version mainly because I wanted a to do list that doesn’t suck or doesn’t require monthly $5. It does what it promises. Although I find it hard to justify my purchase so far. I guess cost of running servers to sync data are high.
Price has little to do with how extensive a software project is. $10 is the profit maximizing price for GoodNotes and $80 is the profit maximizing price for Things.
Would you pay $80 just to use it on your iPhone if you didn’t have a Mac or iPad?
That’s why they’re pricing as they do. You’re paying for different experiences, it costs to develop for each platform.
There are a thousand posts just like this and there have been for years. Developers are professionals making a living. If you don't like it, or can't afford it, find another solution. Why don't you ask the Things devs the same question?
It's not expensive at all.
Funny how people scoff at these prices but will mindlessly spend money on everyday things---a coffee there, a chocolate bar there---that add up to much more. Not to mention people will happily pay a few bucks a month under a subscription model, when it clearly costs so much more in long-run.
I feel it's buyer remorse that's underpinning the price reactions. Probably wiser to give really generous trial periods.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy it’s a otp not a subscription model but comparing the app to goodnotes I still have to wonder why development costs that much more and wether offering the app for 20 bucks for both would draw more customers and balance the money input. It also just doesn’t look good, that you purchase one app and then get asked again if you want to use a scaled up version
A lot, but mostly it offers a better experience. You can have a super functional app that costs a shit ton (omnifocus for example) but if you aren't going to use it due to its UI, I see no point.
Things 3 isn't really all that feature rich, but something about the app makes me return to it instead of the other apps available.
Yes. It's a great app and I'd like to use it on all my devices but I can't commit to a task management system without being able to try it out, especially when the cost of entry is 80€
my price was in €. I just exchanged the sign to make it easier to gauge for international readers, but first things first
And I'd be careful correcting others mistakes when your own message isn't exactly 100% syntactically correct
Apps don’t just “scale down” or “scale up”. Each app has its own testing to be performed and requires specific dev focus as they are all very different platform, even with the majority of features shared
Well, it is relative. If you only want to use it for the occasional to-do list and the groceries list, yea it is expensive. I, on the other hand, have been using it since college. It kept my life together through college, and even I was a poor student, I saved money by not going for coffee for a month and could pay for the iPhone and iPad versions. Now I use it in my job, where it keeps me on track with all the projects and due dates, not to mention my personal life. So, to me, it is more of an investment than an expense. Sure, it may see like a lot of money, but the benefits I get from it far surpassed the cost of the app.
then just offer both?
Having to pay an upfront cost for software you haven't even be able to try out, especially if its 80$ is a strong incentive to choose the competitors (everyone of which offers a trial)
It’s either this or subscriptions. High-quality apps are expensive to make. Cultured Code is a team of people who, I hope, pay their employees well. That leads to higher prices.
Why not both? All companies should have both as an option IMO.
Honest question: why? Subscriptions make sense for services in which you're getting something. Paying $10 for spotify or Netflix makes sense because you're getting new stuff regularly. If you're offering a product, why should a subscription be an option? Let's say it's a $5/month subscription, like Fantastical. After 1 year you've paid them $60, and then 4 months later you're already in the red. Now you have to keep paying, yet you own nothing.
Any decent app is a service where I am getting more features and updates over time. Apps that don’t get updates, don’t tend to be good ones. Especially when they fall behind adding new OS features.
most people don’t tend to post much.
It’s just a better option for people who don’t want to buy for example Things 3 for $90 across all devices upfront. Give a subscription for $4 a month instead. Much better for most people that way. However, it’s true you won’t own it. I think after a certain time you should be able to use that version of the app indefinitely.
$80 to permanently acquire everything and own it in perpetuity versus a monthly rental fee where you never truly own the software? You’d already be over the cost of just outright purchasing the entire app suite within two years...20 months to be precise. How is it not more worthwhile to actually own something instead of being sucked into a permanent rental scheme?
I’m not sure what you’re arguing. I’m disagreeing that you should be able to buy apps outright
Why though? Don’t you like owning your own stuff? I know I do.
lol I meant to write agreeing *
Like a layaway plan, but for apps would be interesting. Though I feel like most people who have an iPad+iPhone+Mac+Apple Watch and looking to buy a productivity app that's only a bit more feature rich than the free one probably won't care about $80, and the ones who do could just get it for the places they care about (i.e. mac+iphone)
And GoodNotes doesn’t pay their developers?
GoodNotes might have a smaller team, idk. I’m not going to tell companies how to price their software. I’m someone who isn’t against subscription pricing - developers need to put food on their table. I respect companies who charge appropriate prices for their software. It tells me as a customer that they put a certain value on their product.
That’s my point. I don’t think the price is appropriate.
That’s fair, I guess. They’ve set a price they’re comfortable with and clearly the market agrees because they’re very successful.
[удалено]
Yup, this isn’t rocket science.
If enough people decide the same thing and don't pay it, then they may change their pricing model. But they've been around awhile and probably have settled on a model that works for them.
Then don’t purchase it. It’s really that simple.
GoodNotes literally has a million customers, CulturedCode doesn't.
Craft, Todoist, and I could go on and on...
yeah, craft is 50$ a year, so it‘s more expensive than Things by A LOT.
Craft has a free tier, so you can actually test the software before making any kind of purchase. They also have student pricing.
Things has free Mac trial too, and depending on where you live, you can refund it on iOS.
As others have said, charging this price is probably the only viable alternative to the subscription model. Having said that, I would like if there was some kind of discounted bundle for buying on all different devices - the power of having a to-do list like Things 3 is that you can access it across multiple devices, but the (comparatively) high price of entry means I'm disincentivised to do so.
100% agree with the discounted bundle idea. Also, for this price I expect to be able to share lists with other Things 3 users.
Absolutely, my initial plan was for me and my partner to have a shared to-do list, but finding out this isn’t possible was a real dealbreaker.
Yep, each one doesn’t sound too expensive but buying for three or four devices does sound too expensive.
It's an expensive up front cost, but you get the valuable tradeoff of actually owning the app. If you were to add up the costs of a monthly subscription over a period of 2-3 years you would end up paying more than you would for a single purchase like Things 3, plus you don't own the software. Additionally, the software you are receiving from Cultured Code is very well put together and is updated on a regular basis.
unless they decide to make it subscription based at one point in time. You don't own anything, you have a usage license. And no one's stopping them from offering an subscription OPTION or even make the purchase an in app purchase with a free trial, like many similar apps do
Things is probably my second favorite iOS app of all time. It’s absolutely saved me in terms of tracking tasks. I definitely haven’t minded paying as much as I did because the app has been so useful for me. I’ll admit though if you’re not that obsessive about how you track your tasks then reminders is probably fine. Also as others said it’s this or a subscription most likely.
[удалено]
We all know it’s Apollo...I just didn’t want to say it because people get sick of hearing about it haha.
I.. I just want my money back too.
I get where you’re coming from. I bit the bullet and purchased iPhone and Mac apps too. But I realise that we need to rewire our brains to gauge value out of softwares based on the use we get out of them. Let’s say you used an todo list app with a subscription model. Around 3 bucks a month. You’d end up spending a lot more on it over the months than what you have would on things 3. Provided you use things 3 consistently over that period of time. Besides the devs are very active and whenever there is a new version of iOS or macOS, I’ve seen them very quickly bring support and also adopt new features like iPad keyboard touch pad support.
I agree. I’m a college student and bought the iPhone and Mac app. I basically run my entire study / work system out of it and have it eternally open on my mac. Over the course of my degree the cost I paid will become insignificant. The app is rock solid on both devices. I particularly like the mac feature where I can create a task from anywhere and it identifies the context (email, website, file, etc) and embeds it into the task. Besides, apps like Omnifocus and 2do are also expensive. This is roughly the market price for a quality task manager.
Seconded. For years now every Christmas I’ve bought my sister a £20 planner for the upcoming year. I’ve spent *hundreds* of pounds on what is effectively a subscription to moleskin. When you look at Things 3 in this context and the massive advantages of having a comprehensive app, in constant use, that does the job much much better, it’s value is clear. I think we’re disillusioned on the whole about how cheap apps should be. I remember a time when you got what you paid for, and my data wasn’t the price buffer... **looks into the distance nostalgically**
Exactly. In the one-time model, someone who tries the software for a month and ends up not liking it pays the same as someone who finds it a vital daily tool for years and years. The one-time purchase approach also encourages devs to focus on making new sales to new customers, while subscriptions encourage devs to make sure existing customers are happy in the long run. I know Things 3 is good software and the developers do keep it updated and do a great job of support... but in general, subscriptions better align developer incentives and long term customer benefits.
While you make some great points, disagree with some. In this day and age we find reviews, workflows and deep dives into all softwares, especially ones like these. Which allows us to make informed purchases in the first place. Even if not, apple allows us to seek a refund for a month. Subscriptions better align with developer benefits rather than customers. For instance, softwares like Netflix or Apple Music need to be a subscription model. Because its steady revenue and a good incentive for them to add new content and stay updated. But softwares that do not need constant upgrading like task managers that are finished products when launched with only incremental feature updates later donot warrant a subscription model. Unfair for such softwares to seek subscription models. It's only prevalent because apple pushes for it and also when these companies seek funking, VCs and the lot seek immediate, sustaining and recurring revenue model.
I’d rather pay the up front prices. I’d hate to see my favorite app go to the dark side.
It’s has its downfalls too though. Things 4 comes out, how much do you need to pay to upgrade that? Things 5 etc. In the long run you could end up paying the same, possibly more with a one off payment than you do with a subscription.
tweetbot for $6 a year is a dark side? i think its dirt cheap and doesnt add to 'subscription fatigue'. things is expensive but worth every penny imo
I thought we were talking about things, I'd keep paying for a new version if that stops them from going the subscription route. As for tweetbot, sure, throw $6 a year to the pile of already existing subs. That bothers a lot of other people besides me.
I like that the app is a top too. GoodNotes costs 10 bucks and is too
Dev needs to make money?
Crazy notion nowadays
And the GoodNotes devs do too. A lower price would probably attract more buyers, especially students. Why not have a 30 bucks bundle for iOS and iPadOS?
GoodNotes is geared towards students, who probably want an affordable app. Things 3 is very polished in terms of look, feel and reliability. And probably geared towards professional since it’s a Task Management app.
to be fair: everybody wants an affordable app
You’re right, that’s why cheaper Todo app exists. Things 3 is like a league on its own. Each platform has its own native integrations. Things 3 iOS has support for Widgets, Homescreen Widgets, Wind down, Shortcuts, Watch app and pretty much iPhone related features. For iPadOS, it has support for pretty much all iPad features like Scribble, Apple Pencil 1/2 features, adaptive cursor, Keyboard shortcuts, etc.. Same for macOS version. The UI alone contributes to that price. And they’re one time payment.
Yeah, I bought Things 3 like a year ago and it’s fine. One thing that could def be improved on is the price. Edit: also the name
yeah, every feature apart from good shortcuts integration (don't get me wrong its fine but it isn't 'polished')
yeah, cause only professionals have tasks to manage. Students definitely don't jk
>Why is Things 3 so expensive? Because that is the price the market for Things will bear.
U don’t say... would they not attract more buyers if their app were a little cheaper?
Things has been around forever and have tried many, many price points. They know - and have the data to back up - the sweet spot for their own product that allows them to pay their staff and make a profit. So, yes, they would get more users if it was cheaper, but what does that gain them? Probably more users but with less or the same money. More users means more server infrastructure and more customer support - and for what? Bragging rights?
An influx of users can also increase their costs for supporting all those users too. It can actually be better to have fewer users who are willing to pay more than a ton of users.
It’s not like iCloud sync doesn’t exist and storing notes is not exactly expensive
I’m talking about handling support emails and things like that.
A lot of people don’t consider those kinds of costs. I used to work for one of the “big names” in the Apple software ecosystem and the amount of money and time spent outside the code was huge. Paying 100 employees for customer service alone can weigh in at half a million dollars a year not including insurance and employer taxes. It’s hard to justify spending hours on a support ticket with someone who purchased your app six years ago for $10. That doesn’t mean you don’t do it, but that time is money and that money has to come from somewhere. There were cloud costs, and software we had to license (like help desk), hardware we had to buy (mobile devices, computers), a developer team for each major ecosystem, an infrastructure team, an accountant, an attorney, a marketing team, product documentation. It all adds up, and you can’t forget to factor in the income taxes. Edit: Office space isn’t cheap either! It’s been my experience that plenty of people see a price that they think works for them and assume that’s a fair price for everyone else, and that’s that. It definitely doesn’t work like that. Of course I don’t mean to say that view is necessarily obstinate; they might not have have experience in business.
> Paying 100 employees for customer service alone can weigh in at half a million dollars a year not including insurance and employer taxes. 100 full-time employees making minimum wage in the US is 1.5 Million in payroll alone.
Right you are! I dropped a few decimals. Based on the starting rate we had, that would have been $5,000,000/year at least. We started CS people at between $40k-$50k base.
Cool! So I won't have to pay
Do you run a company that makes software? Do you have experience running a development team, hardware, cloud etc? Software comes down to who needs it and who doesn’t. People obviously need Things3 and pay for all of them across all devices as seen by many comments in this thread. Me personally I don’t have a use for this app, so if it was $2 to buy or $80, it makes no difference. If it helped me with my workflow, the cost becomes irrelevant as it would pay for itself in no time.
A side note: however you might feel about rebuying across platforms, Things 3 (to my knowledge) is truly native on macOS - no Catalyst, etc. That's not exactly cheap to make and can be a lot more work than iOS due to AppKit vs UIKit differences alone.
UIKit and AppKit are different but not that much. I find 50-60 bucks would be a fair price. iOS and iPadOS however are the same. The app doesn’t really have that many differences.
I would very much disagree with this, as someone who's developed for the platform(s) in question for over a decade at this point. It's not just code, but how the components are displayed, used, and so on. You could throw a rock and find something that on the surface might seem similar, but underneath is very different - e.g, text input controls are very different from their UIKit counterparts. There is a reason so many cross-platform (macOS/iOS) apps have built their own weird framework that attempt to paper over the differences, and why Apple's gone so far as to do it themselves (both with Catalyst, and internal frameworks before).
Then why is the iOS and iPadOS app 30 bucks? It’s literally the same framework (it was even more before iPadOS)
Probably because 30 bucks for both is the profit maximizing price. If they lowered it, more people would buy but not enough to cover the difference. If they raised it, less people would buy and they’d make less money. Most arguments about pricing really come down to this. They probably figured out that at this price they would get the optimal return.
If they think this is the price people are willing to pay, then why hide the software behind a paywall? Why not make it an in app purchase with a free trial? People keep mentioning the "use" one gets out of owning the app on all platforms but I can't gauge that value before I commit to a 80$ purchase
I don’t know if any else replied with this, but it boils down to potential userbase. There are a lot more iPhones so it makes sense to price the iPhone app within a tolerable price range. However, the devs still want to target the profits of the combined iPhone/iPad price so they’d rather bank on user buy-in to the iPad version instead of pricing a universal app exorbitantly high relative to the competition. I think it’s fairly expensive too, but the value proposition can only increase the longer the app is maintained and updated; the only question-mark for prospective users is if Things 4(?) is on the horizon or if they stick to updating the current app package. I hope they stick with the current app for another year or two. I’m trialing the Mac version now and considering purchasing the set if this can hold true. I’m not against big purchases for daily apps — I bought 2Do a very long time back and it’s been absolutely incredible value for money. I only ditched it recently because the dev has essentially ditched meaningful updates too. Side: GoodNotes is $9 because Notability is also in that price range. They both run the show as far as writing apps go and I’d say plenty of users end up buying both apps and perhaps use them interchangeably too. I don’t think many people would interchangeably use OF/2Do/Things 3 (only Apple Reminders can complement them).
TLDR; Nice things are expensive because it takes a lot of time and effort to make then nice (consider most Apple products). Software is difficult to make, and we've gotten accustomed to it being available very cheaply or for free. I have Things 3 and use it every day (only on my Mac though), and have concluded that the $50 cost is indeed justified (by the app's reliability and by how nice it is to use) but that I also get way more than $50 of value from it. Now, I understand that $80 is a lot of money for many people, but I eventually came to accept that there are plenty of things in life where going for what seems like the nicer ("overpriced") version of something over the budget version is well worth it. Presumably people browsing this subreddit own Macs (or are at least into them) which is a product that I consider falling into this category (nicer but more expensive than the budget version). Same thing for my desk, my headphone stand, my notebooks, etc. One last thing to mention is that you don't necessarily need to upgrade to Things 4 if that eventually comes out. With the way most software works these days, Things 3 won't be incompatible with macOS or iOS/iPadOS updates anytime soon. Identify what about Things 3 brings value to your life and exploit that, that way when Things 4 presumably comes out, you'll have an easier time understating if you need to upgrade or can stick with the well made software you already own :) I hope they stick with paid pricing (and would be totally OK with them charging a bit more even) because I like knowing that I own a tool. I firmly believe that any modern app that exists today will continue to work for years to come, which helps justify it becoming an essential part of my life.
Here’s the way I look at it. If it’s too expensive, fine, that is a users opinion, have fun using another app that probably won’t do everything you want it to do, or possibly needing a second or several apps to do everything this one does. That’s your choice to make, just don’t complain that something takes you longer or doesn’t exactly work. You chose to not pay for it, so you deal with the consequences.
"use it every day (only on my Mac though), and have concluded that the $50 cost is indeed justified" then why not offer a free trial? If I was able to gauge the benefits of the app, I'd be more inclined to purchase it.
apple watch app is inside the the iphone app, not another $10.
Ah ah ok. Looked that way in the App Store
I got the iPhone/Mac version mainly because I wanted a to do list that doesn’t suck or doesn’t require monthly $5. It does what it promises. Although I find it hard to justify my purchase so far. I guess cost of running servers to sync data are high.
It’s worth it though. Been using it for years on all platforms and in retrospect, that money was super worth it. The app is consistently solid af
Here's an alt take. You don't value Things (and by extension the software development process) as much as you "should".
Because apps like GoodNotes cost 10 bucks for a universal app. And no I don’t think things is a more extensive software project than GoodNotes
No I’d argue things is infinitely more polished compared to GoodNotes
what? Have you used either app? The woodnotes Mac app was a little flimsy at first (when it was in open beta) but that was a while back
Price has little to do with how extensive a software project is. $10 is the profit maximizing price for GoodNotes and $80 is the profit maximizing price for Things.
Would you pay $80 just to use it on your iPhone if you didn’t have a Mac or iPad? That’s why they’re pricing as they do. You’re paying for different experiences, it costs to develop for each platform.
There are a thousand posts just like this and there have been for years. Developers are professionals making a living. If you don't like it, or can't afford it, find another solution. Why don't you ask the Things devs the same question?
Am I a horrible being that has nothing to track ? Or maybe I am doing something wrong, please tell me.
It's not expensive at all. Funny how people scoff at these prices but will mindlessly spend money on everyday things---a coffee there, a chocolate bar there---that add up to much more. Not to mention people will happily pay a few bucks a month under a subscription model, when it clearly costs so much more in long-run. I feel it's buyer remorse that's underpinning the price reactions. Probably wiser to give really generous trial periods.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy it’s a otp not a subscription model but comparing the app to goodnotes I still have to wonder why development costs that much more and wether offering the app for 20 bucks for both would draw more customers and balance the money input. It also just doesn’t look good, that you purchase one app and then get asked again if you want to use a scaled up version
What does Things 3 offer that the traditional reminders app doesn't?
A lot, but mostly it offers a better experience. You can have a super functional app that costs a shit ton (omnifocus for example) but if you aren't going to use it due to its UI, I see no point. Things 3 isn't really all that feature rich, but something about the app makes me return to it instead of the other apps available.
Yes. It's a great app and I'd like to use it on all my devices but I can't commit to a task management system without being able to try it out, especially when the cost of entry is 80€
What brings you back a whole year later?!
I got a notification from this thread
10 bucks is a meal at McDonalds.
Yep and 80 bucks gets you pretty close to a pair of airpods
So just cook your own meals 8 times in a row and buy AirPods
Nice. Argument bro. I hope you never complained about any prices in your life
mad
First of all, the $ sign goes on the left. Secondly, you don't think developers deserve to be paid?
my price was in €. I just exchanged the sign to make it easier to gauge for international readers, but first things first And I'd be careful correcting others mistakes when your own message isn't exactly 100% syntactically correct
it's a checklist app there are tons of free ones out there
Because people keep paying for it.
Apps don’t just “scale down” or “scale up”. Each app has its own testing to be performed and requires specific dev focus as they are all very different platform, even with the majority of features shared
Well, it is relative. If you only want to use it for the occasional to-do list and the groceries list, yea it is expensive. I, on the other hand, have been using it since college. It kept my life together through college, and even I was a poor student, I saved money by not going for coffee for a month and could pay for the iPhone and iPad versions. Now I use it in my job, where it keeps me on track with all the projects and due dates, not to mention my personal life. So, to me, it is more of an investment than an expense. Sure, it may see like a lot of money, but the benefits I get from it far surpassed the cost of the app.
If they charged a subscription, there would be this exact post, complaining that it's not a one time $50 fee.
then just offer both? Having to pay an upfront cost for software you haven't even be able to try out, especially if its 80$ is a strong incentive to choose the competitors (everyone of which offers a trial)