I saw you post one of your designs earlier in this thread and I disagree. I don't think it looks good. It looks like you opened Photoshop and laid something out in 5 minutes with no regulars for usability, originality, or a nice- looking color scheme. It sort of looks like you we're going for a look the the iPhone app Clear, but I can guarantee the makers of Clear, Real Mac Software, spent in an enormous amount of time on their app. You're pulling this $5,000 out of nowhere. Surely you can find a designer for much less for your basic todo app. I can hire a programmer in India for less than $10 an hour to implement a design of mine. That doesn't mean I should because the code will most certainly suck. You will never succeed by bring generic and average, which is what you seem to be aiming for. If you're not willing to put in the time and money to build a great app, some of your competitors are.

Well, I think the cost / value ratio for that design is very good. Right now I'm trying to finish the app, use this design (which I think definitely above average for Android), and then polish the design or perhaps completely redesign it.

> I disagree, people say my flat designs look great.

Lots of people would also say otherwise, simply by virtue of them being flat. They look like stunted half designs, lacking the the visual cues and polish that make application UX intuitive and understandable.

Yes, but the point is that I created a decent-looking design for a very low price. I could have spent $5000 for an amazing-looking design but that wouldn't be economical.

Let's say you can A) spend 1 hour implementing some sorting algorithm or B) spend 10 hours implementing a 1% faster sorting algorithm. Most of the time A) is better, more economical thing to do. But there are of course situations where B) is better, for example, when the 1% improvement will result in $1M increase in profits. (A = flat design, B = non-flat design.)