VS only licence
Up to now I coul ddevelop everything in Visual Studio. With the new licence-model it just became to expensive.
Actually I do not need XamarinStudio/Email Support/Any other business feature.
The only thing I need is the Visual Studio plugin :-)
I used to love Monotouch commented
They have no competition so they can basically do whatever they want. The partnership with Microsoft means they are mainly targeting big companies. Also the recent trend to move everything into a subscription model is scary!
James Lucas commented
Totally agree with everyone. Developing with Xamarin on Visual Studio is way too expensive. For us .Net guys VS is essential, everything else is window dressing and bloat. It's a shame as it looks a great platform. But for $1K/year I'm not even going to bother trying it as I won't pay that. I've had to start bending my .Net brain to objective-C and xcode and it's actually not bad at all. In some ways I thank you for the high price or I would probably not have tried the native IDE.
Rudá Cunha commented
The market has already proven with App Store that whoever made the success of the store and getting this big market was not large companies but individual developers.
But the command of Xamarin, think you'll make more money selling fewer allowances per year than thousands of licenses or thousands of developers getting a signature.
I would love to pay $ 25 U.S. dollars per month to develop with Visual Studio, it should be a lower cost than the Xamarin Studio.
Think Xamarin, $ 25 dollars a month they can install on 2 licenses (one for osx and another for windows) for more than 400,000 developers.
More than $ 10 million per month = $ 120 million per year.
That if a platform without support, no phone, no charge.
Apple knows that the market is driven by small developers who create incredible solutions, and thereby grow into large companies that generate profits absurd.
Xamarin So, stop thinking small. You already have a mature tool and known in the market. It's time to get thousands of developers and generate more profitability for the company.
The market today is selling cheap and in quantity (generates more income and more developers will join and make propaganda), instead of selling expensive and in small amounts (only large companies).
1000$ to have only the visual studio plugin (i don't need others business features) is too much for me
Well, just ended my trial and although impressed there is no way I am going to pay $ 700,- a year for Visual Studio integration. As the alternative is not a real option it ends here.
As soon as the pricing becomes more independent developer aware I'll be back.
Is there any official response to this? Just seems like 700 odd people on this thread and 500 odd in another thread all saying the same thing without any reply from a Xamarin rep. Only thing keeping more dev's from using Xamarin is Xamarin with the block of VS integration at a price point that's 1000$ per platform
Anton Ookami commented
Please Xamarin! We can't afford $1000 just to connect Xamarin with VS. It's insane...
Derek Beattie commented
I'm doing a project for a startup and I'm not sure they'll buy the business lic. Personally, if the Indie included VS support I'd get both and spend 600/year. I'd be ok with 1k/year for both with vs support.
I'm agree , US1000 is too expensive
This is a good thing tho, whenever someone tend to get too greedy they contribute to the competitor market. I hope there are some other with a better/cheaper solution soon, it probably will be when they cut so big a customergroup.
At $1000/year to rent the software, it makes me want to go native and learn C++, Objective-C, and OpenGL.
Anything over $50/month for a single product is excessive. See Adobe's pricing model for reference. Flash is $20/mo, Dreamweaver is $20/mo, and Creative Cloud is $30/month. They also have an option to buy instead of rent that's priced at roughly 20 times the rental cost.
I was at a .Net developer meeting last night that covered Xamarin exclusively. Over twenty were present. The question was asked - how many have something beyond the starter version? Only one raised his hand. It's a great tool, but your prices are too high to get developer buy-in, especially when it has to come out of their own pockets.
Ron Miller commented
While Xamarin marketing may be targeting corporate developers with its pricing structure, it's the solo developers out there that spread the word on how great the platform is. Sure putting IBM on a banner gets you a little press and gravitas but the community is largely small shops of 1 or a few guys that love to talk about what they use.
Dave Sekula commented
Removing VS and moving it to a higher $999 is pretty lame to be honest with you guys.
Granted - I love the fact that you have created your own IDE (which seems like a reskinned version of VS2010), but don't force us to use it.
I'd lvoe to be able to work in an ide where copy and paste worked properly.
Internally - its great...
Pasting clipboard material copied from an external app... no so much so.
It pastes fine, but then repastes a section of it underneath!
And having to close the solution / xamarin studio after adding a new reference to the project... Come On!
Its just little things like that that have been causing me pain!
Rudá Cunha commented
I also think that a cheaper plan, with only support Visual Studio, would be ideal. With the major bugs have Xamarin Studio IDE (WCF WebService generation totally different Visual Studio with namespaces missing from generated code errors, which have to fix manually, or generate in VS and then copy to the XS.
Code formatting different hotkeys, cross platforms.
All these problems are solved using VS instead of using the XS.
But the price is expensive for a developer absudarmente freelancer.
Another thing ideial would be adding a discount when you buy with MonoDroid MonoTouch type. And the renewal, be cheaper than acquiring.
I'm afraid you're all wasting your breathe expecting an explanation from Xamarin. Their target market isn't the small time developer like you or me, but the big corporates with plenty of money; remember they've got to pay back that $12million investment somehow, and it isn't going to come from $299 indie developers!
Taking away the Android Visual Studio integration from the indie developer was just plain nasty and as Matt says, has left an bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths. Changing the price structure and development platforms so that you can't build anything larger than "Hello World" without coughing up at least $299 for the indie license it also wrong (and please don't keep telling me I can sign up for a 30 day business trial).
As everyone on here says, the Xamarin products are excellent, but that excellence comes at a price not many can afford and it looks like Xamarin are content to let the indie developer fall by the wayside in order to make money.
I was at a cross platform development meeting earlier this year (in Manchester, UK) in which not a single person was happy with your price restructuring (increase) and changes in functionality (less); Even Chris Hardy looked embarrassed when questioned.
Please do the right thing and give us back what we already had before or at least get your pricing structure back to an affordable level - $999 per year? per platform? give us a break!
Matt McAnelly commented
I agree with Sebastien's comment.. $1000 initially with a $200 renewal per platform is about the highest price point that's comfortable for me as an indie developer. Anything more than $300 per platform annually needs to provide more than convenience. I'm with Jashan Chittesh, in that I simply don't need the extra support provided with the business package.
While I do think Xamarin studio is a great offering, I personally feel if you intend to make visual studio integration an option at all, you should open that up to Indie developers. It's not as if most Professional Indie C# developers don't have a visual studio license. At $500 every two years the pro package is quite affordable. How can any Indie justify paying 4-12 times that amount for the convenience of visual studio integration though.
I'm completely behind Xamarin and the work they do with mono. I want to support that effort, however holding my IDE of choice essentially hostage leaves an awfully bad taste in my mouth.
Sébastien D'Errico commented
I am a freelancer and I am really interested about this product but I am shocked to know it will cost me more to renew a Xamarin license than my MSDN license.
I expected to pay the indie license. But 1,000$ for Android and an extra 1,000$ for iOS yearly is steep.
At worst, may I suggest to keep the 1,000$ but lower the renewal fee at 20% (200$) for the following years?
Wiyono Aten commented
Oh no. This is not gonna make people adopting Xamarin for cross-platform dev. Free Starter edition is too restrictive. Indie edition is £250 yet without VS support! IMHO, VS support should be a no brainer for any license/edition - why diverge .NET dev away into 2 separate IDE camps??
Why bother with this challenge when you've really got other competitions to deal and focus with ie. PhoneGap, Titanium etc. Yes, enterprises can afford these licenses, but to compete with those HTML-based solutions or even native (for platform specific dev), ie. to rule the world, you gotta be joking! You must do a bottom-up approach for the adoption - indie and hobbyist devs are your seeds here and the way I see it, this isn't gonna make them have a look. I for one, am seriously rethinking now whether to continue. Please rethink!
Alec Rodden commented
It doesn't matter how great a product Xamarin Studio is, Visual Studio is and forever will be the more mature IDE by virtue of being older. Individual developers that already use Visual Studio at home thanks to their employers deserve to use a great product like this without having to take what they could easily perceive as a step down in their development tools.
This is a glaring flaw in the Xamarin pricing scheme and can only serve as a con for anyone comparing the various multiplatform mobile application solutions.