3 ms·

Thanks for the feedback! Pricing keeps coming up, so we're going to look at what we can do. We don't want to get into providing accurate prices (they change to

by d2p 10y ago

Thanks for the feedback! Pricing keeps coming up, so we're going to look at what we can do. We don't want to get into providing accurate prices (they change too frequently and it'd be a game of cat and mouse; and the intention is not to be a price comparison site) but it's been asked for enough that clearly we need a way to at least show the difference between a $50 toy and a $3000 rig. I'm curious about the negated filters - why would you want to only consider things that don't have a feature? If you don't care about a feature, you can ignore the filter for it, but why (for example) would you specifically want something that doesn't have GPS or doesn't have Altitude Hold?

Zikes 10y ago
I totally understand the pricing issue, and I think a rough estimate would be perfectly fine, even if they were rounded. A "price range rating" might also work, e.g. $, $$, $$$, with each rating representing e.g. $0-99, $100-299, $300+. The negated filters are mostly for when I would anticipate the list to be much longer, so that after you've decided which features you definitely _do_ want, you can say "this list is still too long to narrow down my choice, so I'll just check off a few features I don't necessarily want but which most assuredly would also affect the price".
- d2p 10y ago
  > "this list is still too long to narrow down my choice, so I'll just check off a few features I don't necessarily want but which most assuredly would also affect the price". Wouldn't the price filter remove the need for this (while also ensuring you don't discount something based on the assumption that features always add to price)? Currently the filters are nice toggle switches, but we'd have to change the UI to support "doesn't have", so we'd have to come up with a good UI and be sure it's really adding value to really do it. Thanks again!

by d2p 10y ago

Zikes 10y ago

I totally understand the pricing issue, and I think a rough estimate would be perfectly fine, even if they were rounded. A "price range rating" might also work, e.g. $, $$, $$$, with each rating representing e.g. $0-99, $100-299, $300+. The negated filters are mostly for when I would anticipate the list to be much longer, so that after you've decided which features you definitely _do_ want, you can say "this list is still too long to narrow down my choice, so I'll just check off a few features I don't necessarily want but which most assuredly would also affect the price".

d2p 10y ago
> "this list is still too long to narrow down my choice, so I'll just check off a few features I don't necessarily want but which most assuredly would also affect the price". Wouldn't the price filter remove the need for this (while also ensuring you don't discount something based on the assumption that features always add to price)? Currently the filters are nice toggle switches, but we'd have to change the UI to support "doesn't have", so we'd have to come up with a good UI and be sure it's really adding value to really do it. Thanks again!