Are you guys living in the real world?

dontforgetmario's Avatar


14 Apr, 2007 01:24 PM


I know it costs work and effort to build this kind of applications, but IMHO you are just starting, your application is still a Pseudo Beta and you are asking for prices which are too much for what you are offering. Just a nice Mac like interface is not enough to ask so much at the beginning.

Your application still lacks a bunch of important features, which takes time to implement, but you don't offer Reports, Calendar, Charts, Chat, Writeboard....mmmm, what I mean is that you have to give, before you start to recieve.

What shall I do with a free plan which jailed you in a limit of two users and no open projects? In a real world this plan is uselees and the 10$ plan is not that usefull. I know comparations are not nice, but the reallity is that internet is a wild world. Zoho Projects, e.g. an application which is running for more than 8 months gives you in their free plan unlimited user accounts, timesheets, 100 MB space, different reports options, including a nice gantt chart features, calendar, milestone calendar, you can add notes to tasks (with it you can build a Pseudo Ticket system), they have a relative crowed forum and they hear users request (which I guess you do aswell). Unfortunatelly the application does not have a Mac like look, for me a big drawback, must admit.

GoPlan offers you as well a nice ticket sistem, mac like look and a bunch of nice features and is still cheaper than you on the 12$ plan (I don't like their free plan either)

What you need is a to be well known, attract a lot of users to you by giving them a lot a the beginning (like Zoho), create a nice big user community and then when you start to be big and strong, you can start to offer real world prices for a nice full featured mature application. Your application has potential but without a big user community mmmmmm....... there is no future.

Zoho makes this, Basecamp made that as well, ActiveCollab are making this as well.... and is working!!!!

just my 2 cents

Good Luck Mario

  1. 1 Posted by Rick on 14 Apr, 2007 06:02 PM

    Rick's Avatar

    Thanks for your comments on the pricing plan. It's a delicate balancing act, and we will adjust (lower) the prices if necessary.

  2. 2 Posted by Martin Pilkingt... on 18 Apr, 2007 03:57 PM

    Martin Pilkington's Avatar

    dontforgetmario: The things you are listing as missing from Lighthouse are part of the reason why I prefer it to the likes of basecamp. Basecamp is way too big, some people just don't need charts, chat, calendar etc. They want to track issues. You also have to realise that Lighthouse is more than a Mac like interface in just it's looks. You can put aqua style buttons onto Windows XP but it isn't a Mac like interface. Lighthouse is also extremely simple and intuitive to use.

    There is a reason why there are different products out there, and that is because people want different things. Lighthouse may not be for you, but other products that you like may not be for someone like me.

  3. 3 Posted by Rick on 18 Apr, 2007 06:41 PM

    Rick's Avatar

    bq. Basecamp is way too big, some people just don’t need charts, chat, calendar etc.

    Basecamp has none of those things :) I think you're confusing it with GoPlan? I wouldn't call it too big though. We love Basecamp (and especially Highrise), but the fact is we needed something developer centric.

  4. 4 Posted by Nazgum on 22 May, 2007 12:18 PM

    Nazgum's Avatar

    I agree with Pilky mostly, one of the reasons I like this app is the simplicity and lack of features =) I personally don't want a calendar or writeboard or chat added to clutter the ui when I will never use them.

    I agree the pricing may be a little high though, for the personal and bronze at least. Perhaps you would get a few larger projects who choose those plans, but i would expect you mostly get smaller developers wanting to manage their personal projects, and in that case $10 and $24 seems a little high.

  5. 5 Posted by john.postlethwa... on 30 Oct, 2007 07:27 AM

    john.postlethwait's Avatar

    It has just about everything necessary for my project, if you need more I say go to any one of those sites you listed. I signed up because it doesn't have any of that erroneous stuff. When you need that many tools to communicate you are at a point where you spend more time managing your project then you do actually getting work done on it.

    It seems to me Lighthouses unique value proposition is exactly what you described: Not having "Reports, Calendar, Charts, Chat, Writeboard..." If it ever did get all of that stuff I would leave.

    This is a tool for developers and it is suiting my project very well.

  6. 6 Posted by steve_ on 03 Nov, 2007 12:10 AM

    steve_'s Avatar

    I thought I'd add to this :)

    I agree, the simplicity is perfect and the look and feel make all the difference.

    Zoho I find has the worse feel when you try and use but yes, it has the most features.

    I use Lighthouse specifically as an internal ticketing system and communication is only needed between developers in it and not clients so comments on tickets and assigning tickets is perfect.. nothing else needed.

    I did in the beginning find the price a little high too but still bought in because of the simplicity so I considered buying in part of investing in such a great system that will over time, grow to gain some more features / functionality that best suits this system.

    Keep up the great work and keep it simple..

  7. 7 Posted by mbrenwall on 26 Mar, 2008 08:02 PM

    mbrenwall's Avatar

    I'd very much like to add my vote for keeping it SIMPLE. There are so many other heavyweights out there that are too bloated and would take me several training sessions to even instruct my issue reporters how to use. I specifically am looking for the industry leading issue tracker that is elegant and simple and so far this is it.

    I have no problem paying the rates you are currently asking for!

  8. 8 Posted by raizyr on 28 Mar, 2008 01:08 PM

    raizyr's Avatar

    Agreed keep it simple, and allow integration with others. One of the reason's I use Lighthouse is that Beanstalk integrates with it. Both apps are simplistic and focus on doing one thing well, which is how it should be :)

  9. 9 Posted by James Huggett on 13 Nov, 2008 05:16 PM

    James Huggett's Avatar

    Simple and clean is good, but I would urge caution at dismissing the needs of QA, Management etc and just focusing on developer needs....which can be quite different.

    I am currently evaluating other issue trackers to see wether we need to move from Lighthouse or not..... custom fields for say severity, or reporting/data export are important requirements. As mentioned in a previous thread, tags are too noisy for certain issue attributes.

    Developers tend to have a fast and loose approach to issue tracking - no steps in their bugs, slam them in quickly and often little explanation of their fixes :-). This is all normal but there are other groups of people who have different needs and approachs to issue tracking, and if Lighthouse has too much of a dev. bias it could alienate people, or need to be replaced as the company grows for instance. Shifting trackers is a big PITA .

    I do like Lighthouse a lot, and I think the rest of the team does - lovely interface and nicely designed.

    As QA, one or more optional custom fields and data export (even better custom reports/graphs) would be great and I think that can be done without bloating the app.

  10. 10 Posted by Martin Pilkingt... on 13 Nov, 2008 05:50 PM

    Martin Pilkington's Avatar

    @jahuggett But taking the focus away from developers means that developers lose out. The good thing about Lighthouse is that it does put focus more on development which is good for small teams where the QA may be the same as the devs. Of course for custom fields you can extend the tags and for data export there's the API. Personally I like Lighthouse as is. The reason I don't like other bug trackers is the sheer number of fields and complexity caused by trying to please all sorts of users.

  11. 11 Posted by James Huggett on 17 Nov, 2008 04:39 PM

    James Huggett's Avatar

    @Pilky I'm not advocating bloating lighthouse. Additional custom fields and data export are hardly bloat in my opinion....just a hair less 'ultra leanness' and certainly can be invisible in the default app configuartion. Bear in mind, that as companies grow or are succesful often dedicated product management or QA become involved, and if a developer is asked for some reports/metrics and can't deliver, this could eventually result in moving to a different defect tracker (and then everyone loses!!). The type of QA/management activities on small lean teams is generally quite understanding of the need for agility: don't think that focusing a bit on their needs is somehow making a pact with the evil empire :-) Lean RAD/agile teams can and do have testers/managers on them as well who understand that cumbersome tools and burdensome process are NOT what is required.

  12. Support Staff 12 Posted by Tiger Team on 17 Nov, 2008 05:25 PM

    Tiger Team's Avatar

    We're working on data export; what sort of things would you like?

  13. 13 Posted by James Huggett on 17 Nov, 2008 07:03 PM

    James Huggett's Avatar

    Off the top of my head quickly and without thinking it through deeply:

    Save data out as a delimited text file for dumping into excel etc

    Can choose fields to export or not export...thus avoid bloating file with tags or comments for instance.

    Export particular queries/projects (so I can build a query in the normal way, then export the result to txt file).

    Ability to save export configurations

    The whole thing could be command line using the query syntax with some other export commands I say a mechanism for saving 'export bins' would be good here. Can easily reuse, pop output into excel and build a graph or sort etc.

  14. Support Staff 14 Posted by Tiger Team on 17 Nov, 2008 08:28 PM

    Tiger Team's Avatar

    Thanks, this is very useful.

  15. 15 Posted by Rick on 17 Nov, 2008 08:46 PM

    Rick's Avatar

    We have an API already. I don't see the need to add more export features. Though we're planning on adding a family of miniapps to add these fringe features to Lighthouse. For instance, an export app that would convert the xml dump into a csv file for you with savable recipes.

  16. 16 Posted by James Huggett on 17 Nov, 2008 08:58 PM

    James Huggett's Avatar

    @Rick --- I have not investigated the API - time pressures. Usability of API depends on programming ability of may generally find managers etc lighterweight in this regard than Dev :-) - and same managers will likely want dev doing client work rather than bug tracker extension. Obvious point I know. Miniapps sound good way to approach things.

  17. Support Staff 17 Posted by Tiger Team on 17 Nov, 2008 09:00 PM

    Tiger Team's Avatar

    Yes that's what I'm talking about. We can open source the reporting
    miniapp and people can help out by scratching their own itch.

    On Nov 17, 2008, at 12:46 PM, [email blocked] wrote:

  18. 18 Posted by Nicole on 09 Dec, 2008 09:25 PM

    Nicole's Avatar

    Rick recently added some awesomeness to the API, you can follow or for updates on Lighthouse features as we roll them out.

  19. 19 Posted by Ask Bjørn Hanse... on 06 Jan, 2009 11:48 PM

    Ask Bjørn Hansen's Avatar

    Just as a counterpoint: We're on the bronze plan and I think the price is great. We're at 15 users, so we have to upgrade when we need more users; but the price will still be ok.

    Sure there are some features we'd like; but mostly we like not having all the features we don't care about that others would want to pollute the system with.

    One thing that was a little weird for how we use it about the plans was the 240% price increase to go from 10 to 15 users; but the amount we pay is fine.


Discussions are closed to public comments.
If you need help with Lighthouse please start a new discussion.

Keyboard shortcuts


? Show this help
ESC Blurs the current field

Comment Form

r Focus the comment reply box
^ + ↩ Submit the comment

You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac