Tweetbot for Mac is available in the App Store
tapbots.com
tapbots.com
Personally, I'm not ready to buy yet. I paid $3 and $5 for Tweetbot for iPhone and iPad and I'm happy with the value they provide me. Does Tweetbot/Mac offer more (and 4-6x more) value than the iOS versions? Probably not to me and not to a lot of other people.
That said, it's dangerous to use price as a way to protest the user token limit. You're hearing people complain about the price rather than complain about the user token limit that resulted in the price. And it gives Twitter ammo to point back to Tweetbot and say, "See, it is still possible to make money from clients despite the token limit!"
It may have been better to cap out early and have people complain that the app has been pulled, but that would result in sacrificing the product for the cause.
http://tapbots.com/blog/news/tweetbot-mac
> hese tokens dictate how many users Tweetbot for Mac can have. The app’s limit is separate from, but much smaller than, the limit for Tweetbot for iOS. Once we use up the tokens granted to us by Twitter, we will no longer be able to sell the app to new users. Tapbots will continue to support Tweetbot for Mac for existing customers at that time.
I would've paid the same amount even if it wasn't for the Twitter token restriction issue because $20 is not that much for an app use a few good times per hour every single day.
That said, I may buy it. I know of no other single column mac native twitter client that is retina ready. Seeing as the twitter token limit is discouraging devs from creating new clients, it may be best to fork over the 20 bucks before the token limit for tweetbot is hit.
I really just wish tweetdeck would allow for a single column layout. I keep twitter open on the right side of my screen 24/7 like a news ticker, so single column is a necessity. Tweetdeck is the only app they're maintaining and it doesn't allow for that.
Edit: Scratch that, give https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/yorufukurou/id428834068?mt=1... a try
I have to admit blinking twice my eyes. On the other hand, if we don't want too many Sparrow episodes, developers should be compensated enough.
I guess that this also makes a strong point for App.net: users won't be bothered with apps and growth of the third-party ecosystem isn't artificially restricted.
I really, really like Twitter for Mac, even if it's abandoned now. I'm not sure if Tapbots has fixed it (and I'm not going to spend $20 on a client I don't like the visuals of to find out), but Twitter for Mac absolutely beat Tweetbot Alpha in scrolling (using TwUI helps quite a bit most likely). So I'll keep using that for now on my external monitor where it doesn't look blurry.
[1]:
* Safari
* iTerm2
* Xcode
* Messages
* MacVim
* iTunes
edit: I know about the bug you mentioned and it looks like they've fixed it.
However, everything that Panic makes is incredible in both quality and Mac-ness. I use Transmit and love it, didn't think of it when making that list since it's not something you have open all of the time.
Then, look at Panic's iOS apps. They feel like iOS apps. Diet Coda and Coda are companion products, but they aren't identical. They each look and feel how an application on their respective platforms should feel (which is fairly open ended on iOS, but restrictive on OS X due to the shared desktop canvas).
Few other apps I use or have used in the past, non-Apple, fit in pretty well:
* Adium
* Colloquy
* Chrome
* NetNewsWire
* Reeder
* Sparrow
However, 3rd party clients were the route into Twitter for a huge amount of early adopters (and even later adopters). Most Twitter "features" (including the retweet concept, hashtags an even the word "tweet") were from the open community they started with. Moreover, their own clients are falling behind even simple 3rd party experiences. Twitter for Mac has, essentially, been abandoned. How many users will swallow an inferior experience, just for the privilege of getting adverts thrust in?
For my 2p, I certainly won't - to me, the value of Twitter has been decreasing over time, not increasing. As it moves towards "mass market", it seems to be seeking a broadcast model, where billions of users subscribe to feeds of a few celebrities. It's becoming a "send only" service - the total amount of micro-conversions I've had in the last year is much lower than even 2 years ago.
Perhaps this will work out for them as a company - a real time newswire for companies and celebs to send 140 character press releases, interspersed with adverts. Or maybe I'm wrong, and mass adoption of their web and iffy mobile/desktop clients is coming. I just can't see it, yet.
If it were, on the other hand, that would make me more inclined to purchase. It'd be great to combine those experiences.
Essentially because there are some users who will pay the $20.00 amount, and there are limited seats, they are maximizing earnings/user.
Personally, this app falls into a weird space between the native Twitter client (consumer) and HootSuite (professional). I can't bring myself to label TweetBot as pro-sumer, due to lack of features.
Is there any way to test before you purchase? I didn't find a demo.
Charging the same price as the Mountain Lion upgrade.
Or we can think of it in an equally useless point of view: over a year it's just $1.67 a month. That's less than the cost of a cup of coffee!
ML1 - Mountain Lion
Apple can rely on the fact that Mountain Lion is a yearly update, they can afford to market and promote the product, and it doubtless has a lead-in for hardware sales too.
Tweetbot on iOS is, when you consider the relative size of installation bases for iOS devices and Macs, comparably priced. You can sell an iOS Twitter client at a reduced cost because there are just so many more iOS devices out there. To justify maintaining a Mac codebase you need to charge more.
At $20 a pop, the devs clear $14, and that means Tweetbot for Mac's lifetime revenue cap is a measly 1.4 million dollars.
On a site lite hackernews, you presumably know something about the very high price of software engineering skills. Are you seriously asserting, with a straight face, that an app representing as much engineering time investment and polish as Tweetbot does is a scheme to price-gouge users, when the most revenue the devs will ever see from it is $1.4 million, lifetime, which needs to cover not just initial development costs but also ongoing maintenance and development?
If anything it's a labour of love on their part.
So for approximately 10 months work, $1.4M divided by 2 developers, so, annualized, about $1M/yr/developer.
That's not including the fact that during the same time frame, they're developing and releasing more applications (sources of revenue).
That's some labour of love, even if you factor in 3 more years of ongoing maintenance and development.
I'd love to have a labour of love that nets me around $250,000/year income as a base.
$1.4 million is the all-time, sell out all your tokens maximum, assuming 0 piracy (because every pirate takes away from that 100k token ceiling), not for 10 months of work but for 10 months of work + all work going forward. Very, very few products are sustainable when their absolute all time revenue ceiling is a paltry $1.4 million. To argue that that ceiling is too high, that they should be selling for, what, $9.99 (all time revenue ceiling: $700k) or $2.99 ($210k lifetime max) is nuts.
> I'd love to have a labour of love that nets me around $250,000/year income as a base.
Then I'd suggest building good software and charging what you're worth. By playing the "a very polished piece of software is overpriced because it costs as much as the price of having a pizza delivered" game, you're only participating in the devaluation of your own skills.
If you can sell a twitter app for 20 bucks, by all means, do it!
Deleted comment