The best Opal alternatives are ScreenZen for a free, donation-supported blocker, Jomo for Apple users who want paid features at a fair annual price, one sec for a behavior-focused pause instead of a hard block, and Freedom for blocking every device at once. Each undercuts Opal Pro’s $99.99 per year on its own verified pricing page.
Why look past Opal at all? The app works, and its own materials show a 4.8 rating across 150,000-plus app ratings. The usual reason is price or model: Opal Pro is listed at $8.29 per month billed annually ($99.99 per year), $19.99 billed monthly ($239 per year), or $399 as a one-time payment, per Opal’s pricing page. If you mainly need one blocking rule, Opal’s own free plan ($0, one rule, basic timers) already covers the simplest cases, and the alternatives below take different approaches to the same problem: making the distracting app harder to open.
Quick verdict: pay nothing with ScreenZen; pay once for the most polished Apple experience with Jomo; choose one sec if hard blocks have failed you before; choose Freedom for cross-device sessions across a Mac and phone. The broader field is covered in our focus apps hub, and the alternatives here sit alongside the calendar apps and remote work tools most remote setups already combine.
Opal (reference)
ScreenZen
Jomo
one sec
Freedom
Approach
Rules-based blocking, hard mode
Delay and limits before opening
Sessions, actions and limits
Interruption and breathing pause
Cross-device blocking sessions
Platforms
iOS, Android, Mac
iOS, Android, macOS, Windows
iPhone, iPad, Mac
iOS, Android, browser extension
Mac, Windows, iOS, Android, Chromebook
Free tier
1 rule
Everything, donations supported
1 session, 1 action or limit
Core features free
Yes, limited sessions
Paid price (list)
$99.99/yr, $239/yr monthly billing, or $399 lifetime
Four alternatives, chosen because each is live, maintained, and priced verifiably as of the dates in Build notes. ScreenZen is the only one on this list that is fully free with no subscription, and the developer’s own site states it plainly: “Less screen time. No subscription.” Jomo’s pricing page lists a free plan (one session, one action or limit, one screen time budget) alongside a $29.99 annual plan and a $99.99 single purchase. one sec’s site confirms free essentials with paid unlimited apps, and cites peer-reviewed research for its intervention method. Freedom’s pricing page documents a free plan with cross-device sessions plus Premium at $3.33 per month billed yearly, $8.99 month-to-month, or a promotional lifetime price of $99.50 at the time of checking.
I have kept the comparison to blockers that handle both apps and websites, because a phone-only blocker solves half of a remote worker’s problem; the desktop browser is usually the other half. For a closer look at the cross-device option, see our Freedom review.
Head-to-head: feature by feature
Blocking mechanics
Opal’s headline paid feature is Hard Mode: per its pricing page, “no way out. You can’t turn Opal off.” ScreenZen takes the softer path: per its site and App Store listing, it adds a configurable delay before an app opens, prompts before an app can be used again, supports daily limits and scheduled blocks, and includes a lock mode designed to protect against common loopholes such as deleting the app. Jomo uses sessions: blocks that activate for a set period, triggered by time or by actions, with Strict Mode as its paid hard-block tier. one sec interrupts the app open with a breathing exercise or reflection, then optionally blocks; its FAQ confirms complete blocking is available during block sessions. Freedom runs blocking sessions synced across devices, with Locked Mode as the paid anti-quit feature.
The mechanical difference matters more than marketing. If you have never stuck with a soft approach, delay-based tools can be undone by a determined version of yourself at 11 pm; a hard lock cannot. If hard locks have failed you before (most people just turn them off eventually), the friction approach is the one with better evidence behind it, discussed next.
Behavior change and evidence
one sec is the outlier here because its method has been studied. The developer links to a 2023 PNAS paper on directing smartphone use through the one sec self-nudge app, plus follow-up work and a 2025 field experiment by the Danish Competition and Consumer Authority. The company reports 57 percent fewer app openings on average, a figure that comes from that research rather than a marketing survey. ScreenZen’s claims are user-reported (its site cites an average of three hours taken back per day, as reported by users), which I would treat as anecdote, not evidence. Opal and Jomo make no comparable published research claims, and neither should be credited with one.
Platform coverage
If you need one blocker on an iPhone and a Windows PC, the field narrows: Freedom covers Mac, Windows, iOS, Android, and Chromebook per its pricing page. ScreenZen states it is free on iOS, macOS, Windows, and Android. one sec covers iOS, Android, and a browser extension for desktop. Jomo is Apple-only (iPhone, iPad, Mac). Opal covers iOS, Android, and Mac. This single row eliminates two options for most mixed-device remote workers.
Scheduling and automation
Scheduling separates the paid tiers. Freedom puts recurring scheduled sessions behind Premium; its free plan handles manual sessions across devices. Jomo’s free plan includes a single session and single action, enough to run one working-hours block, while up to ten sessions and Strict Mode are paid. Opal’s free tier is one rule; scheduling many rules across the day is a Pro feature. ScreenZen supports schedules and daily limits inside its free app. If your need is “one block every workday,” every tool here can do it free or nearly free; if your need is a multi-rule regime, the paid tiers differ mainly in price.
Privacy posture
Claims here come from the vendors themselves, so weigh them on that basis. one sec states that intervention logic runs locally and that it does not sell or analyze data. Freedom states it does not track browsing or app usage. ScreenZen is donation-supported, which removes the subscription incentive to expand data collection, though it is still a young product. Opal’s model is subscription-based; review its privacy documentation directly if that matters to you. None of these statements is independently audited here.
Price and value
Detail in the pricing section below. Structural summary: ScreenZen is free; Jomo is the cheapest paid annual at $29.99; Freedom’s annual is $39.99 equivalent ($3.33 monthly billed yearly); Opal Pro is $99.99 annually. A one-time Jomo license costs $99.99, and Freedom’s promotional lifetime sits at $99.50, both roughly the cost of a single year of Opal Pro.
Which alternative fits which workflow
You want free, full stop, on phone and desktop: ScreenZen. No subscription, delay-based blocking plus lock mode, iOS, Android, macOS, and Windows. The trade-off is polish and scale: it is a smaller, younger product than the subscription competitors.
You are Apple-only and want paid polish at a fair price: Jomo. $29.99 per year or $99.99 once, Apple-native, sessions plus actions, Strict Mode included in paid. If you found Opal’s price the barrier but liked the model, Jomo is the closest structural match at a third of the annual cost.
Hard blocks have failed you before: one sec. The interruption approach has published research behind it, and its FAQ confirms strict blocking exists when you need it. Best for people who uninstall blockers within a week because the block itself becomes the enemy.
You need one block covering a Mac and a phone at once: Freedom. Cross-device synced sessions are its core identity, free plan included, with scheduling and Locked Mode on Premium. This is the pick for remote workers whose distraction migrates from phone to browser mid-task.
You actually like Opal but not the bill: Opal’s own free tier (one rule) is legitimate, and its student discount is documented at up to 50 percent off Pro. Before switching, check whether one rule is enough; for many people it is.
Pricing compared
All figures are current list prices from each vendor’s own pricing page as of the dates in Build notes; verify before buying, because this category changes prices often.
Opal Pro: $8.29 per month billed annually ($99.99 per year), $19.99 billed monthly ($239 per year), or $399 one-time. Free plan: $0 with one rule.
ScreenZen: free. The site states it is donation-supported with no subscription.
Jomo: free plan with 1 session, 1 action or limit, 1 screen time budget. Jomo Plus: $29.99 annual, $99.99 single purchase (shareable with five family members), $14.99 annual for students.
one sec: free essentials (including the breathing intervention); Pro unlocks unlimited apps and extended customization. Pricing is sold through the app and varies by platform and region, so verify in the store listing; third-party reviews have listed premium around $3.99 per month, which I would treat as indicative only.
Freedom: free plan with cross-device sessions; Premium $3.33 per month billed yearly or $8.99 month-to-month; a promotional lifetime license was listed at $99.50 (50 percent off $199) at the time of checking.
The long-run picture: over three years, Jomo’s annual is about $90 total, Freedom’s yearly billing about $120, Opal Pro about $300. Against a $99.99 lifetime Jomo or a $99.50 promotional Freedom lifetime, Opal’s $399 lifetime is roughly the cost of four years of Opal Pro itself. None of these numbers accounts for sales, and all of them were accurate only on the day captured.
How to switch without losing your data
Screen time blockers hold little data, which makes switching genuinely easy, but a few steps save you a week of friction.
Screenshot your Opal rules first. Capture which apps are blocked, at which times, and any limits you set. You are rebuilding the config, not migrating it; no tool here imports another’s rules.
Remove Opal cleanly. Use the app’s own removal process rather than deleting the icon, since blockers that use screen-time APIs or device profiles can leave permissions behind. On iOS, check Settings for leftover screen-time or VPN-style configurations.
Grant the new app its permissions deliberately. Every tool here needs screen time, accessibility, or VPN-style permissions to function. Set them on day one while you are motivated, and set the anti-bypass option (ScreenZen’s lock mode, Jomo’s Strict Mode, Freedom’s Locked Mode) immediately, because the moment you will want it is not a moment you will be motivated.
Expect a two-week adjustment. Behavioral evidence from the one sec research tradition suggests friction works by interrupting habit loops, which takes repetition. Judge the new tool after two week
s, not two days.
Keep Apple or Google’s built-in screen time as the backstop. Free, native, and independent of any vendor’s survival. It is cruder than all of these apps and it cannot be priced out of your reach.
Frequently asked questions
What are the best opal alternatives?
For most people: ScreenZen if you want free without a subscription, Jomo if you are on Apple devices and want paid features at $29.99 per year, one sec if interruption-based friction with published research appeals to you, and Freedom if you need one block across a computer and phone simultaneously. All four are live, documented, and cheaper than Opal Pro’s $99.99 annual list price.
Which alternative is closest to the original?
Jomo is structurally closest to Opal: rules-based sessions, scheduled blocks, a strict paid mode, and a lifetime purchase option, on Apple devices. The main differences are price ($29.99 annual versus $99.99) and platform (no Android). If platform breadth matters more than the model, Freedom is the closer functional match across mixed devices, though its mechanics are session-based rather than rule-based.
Is it worth switching?
If Opal Pro’s $99.99 annual price stings and you use one or two rules, probably yes; the same one-rule setup is free in Opal’s own free tier or in ScreenZen. If you rely on Hard Mode and multi-rule schedules and the price does not bother you, switching buys you little, and the honest answer is to stay. Switch for a concrete reason: price, platform gap, or a method mismatch, not for novelty.
