[quote=363995:@Norman Palardy]Didn’t miss that point at all
It’s not easy to convey everything I wrote in 7 characters if all Ric focused on is “$699/yr”
I could see how anyone who only looks at that might indeed think it’s a subscription[/quote]
Yep. Each price at https://www.xojo.com/store/ says $x/yr. So it’s reasonable for Ric to think it’s a subscription.
It should probably state:
$x
Including One Year of Updates!
Might also be good to sort the products by price so the scary Enterprise price is lower and the attractive one Desktop Target is seen first.
I like that I can try Xojo for free and develop an app until the point where I see that I like the IDE and want to start building executables (at which point I pay).
I don’t like that with the Lite licence, I can’t save the project in text form, which makes version control harder unnecessarily.
[quote=364090:@Tim Streater]
I don’t like that with the Lite licence, I can’t save the project in text form, which makes version control harder unnecessarily.[/quote]
I think they would disagree that it is unnecessary.
They see the lite license as geared towards hobbyists, most of which do not use version control.
Also it makes it harder for a company to have multiple developers using the free version or lite version and only buying one X-Platform build license when all are working on an X-Platform app(s).
For individual professional developers, if one is going to commit to a big long term project (where that is most important), one obviously has decided that they like the product, and that is an inducement to buy a more expensive version.
After all they are a for profit company and need to make money to exist!
I disagree. I’m a hobbyist but I like to use version control.
I think there is a big price difference between Lite version and Desktop version. I would like to save my projects in text form, but for me it’s very expensive to pay 200 dollars more for this feature.
The problem with programmers is that we are a very diverse population, and there will always be exceptions to the rule.
I have known the time when there was simply no trial version for RealBasic. Being able today to run in the IDE and save in binary format is a huge advantage for people with limited budget.
Now, there always comes that thin frontier between a hobbyist and a professional where ambition becomes expensive. Although Xojo is way less money costing than, say, water ski or car racing.
I don’t think Xojo should give everything for nothing. It is not a non-profit organization and it makes sense they sell what they produce. I depend on their well being for my business and would not see it any other way.
Like scar, I consider myself a hobbyist too, who likes to use version control. My day job is all .NET, so the Xojo license came out of my own pocket and I learn and play in my off time.
Though, because my Xojo ambitions are for both Desktop & Mobile apps, I bit the bullet (so to speak) and went for the Pro license.
But once you convert the price to Canadian dollars, the amount is not trivial. So I can see that some countries and economies may see an even more intimidating challenge in justifying the expense. But l can’t argue that Xojo doesn’t deserve a healthy enough revenue stream to keep the product development alive and it’s staff gainfully employed.
Be that as it may, it was always clear to me before buying (via the FAQ’s on the Store page), how the subscription works.
Plus there is the 90 day money back guarantee - which I think must be a first, when it comes to software products(?). I’ve seen 30 days before, but never a 90 day one, I don’t think.
The above two points were helpful contributing factors in my decision.
So maybe as a suggestion, the wording of the subscription and the 90 day guarantee could be more prominently placed?
My apologies if someone has already suggested this. Thanks.
[quote=364607:@scarJessLpezSierra]I disagree. I’m a hobbyist but I like to use version control.
[/quote]
Basically, so am I (I do use Xojo for work, but my job title has nothing to do with IT or coding)… I have a desktop license and don’t use version control (though perhaps i should)
I don’t know if my comment will be clear, you know, it could be lost in translation.
I see Xojo, with the ability to create and run projects (even in debug mode) as a very generous option. Most other paid tools are very limited in what you can do without paying.
I see Xojo, that they promote as cross platform, selling ‘lite’ versions for only 1 platform. I think that’s great tool. New comers like me, can test Xojo, like Xojo, buy the lite version for the platform they want, build apps and run them in any machine. Sure there are features that are not included, but that’s a trade off that is comparable to other software tools.
Anyway I do prefer to have the ‘lite’ version without the save as text feature at $99. As a newbie, I didn’t know about version control before Xojo. And for me it was weird to see lite version at $99 and the desktop at $299. I don’t work with Linux, so for me thinking I could buy 2 lite versions (Windows/Mac) for less than the desktop version that I don’t need. I’m missing something for sure.
I don’t think there is a single person there are many people that would not want more features at a cheaper price. I guess there are other features missing from the lite version. I do prefer a $99 lite version than a $149 or $199 version with version control. Edit: Others would love a $149-$199 version with version control and be able to use it in 2 computers.
I would love to be able to pay for 3rd party plugins at a lower price too.
As some people already said:
Xojo needs to make money
There is no one kind of clients
Even hobbyists are too diverse
we all want to save money
Edit:
Emile, I agree with you, I should not generalize.