Comment by piker

Comment by piker 4 days ago

Great feedback; and I do agree. The HN link goes to the app itself because we're impatient, but there is an actual landing page most visitors hit.

I've gone back and forth on the UX idea, and while I do agree, it's important that Tritium selects for users that are going to be able to quickly adopt the newer concepts. Just simply presenting a "better Word" isn't really going to move the needle. It's really a shift in expectations. That said, I have recently backed off defaulting to dark mode to make it feel slightly more familiar.

brundolf 4 days ago

I think software people tend to underestimate the value of superficial familiarity. By all means, adhere to your new concepts and mental model. But even things like coloring, placement of the menu bar, the icons that you use, the organization of the UI, etc can go a really long way

Think about programming languages- ones that introduce radical new concepts may still employ familiar syntax/naming to smooth the transition for newcomers. Rust mimicked C++, TypeScript extended JS, etc. These languages were made to introduce powerful new ways of thinking about code, but by appearing as similar as possible to what devs already knew, they freed up more brain cycles for people trying to adopt them. They didn't muddy their concept-space for the sake of familiarity, but they didn't introduce any more unfamiliarity than they actually needed to for the benefits they wanted to give

Reply View 4 replies

singleshot_ 4 days ago

No attorney who is flummoxed by this UX is going to touch an AI product in any meaningful way. Making legal tools for lawyers who would otherwise be using cuneiform tablets or the dictation pool is a waste of conversation. Looking similar to the tools a seventy five year old lawyer uses is like making an F1 car that would look familiar to Jackie Stewart: yeah, it’d probably help him adapt, but not enough to be competitive with an actual car.
Dig the idea of this product, will give it a whirl tonight.
Source: attorney, former dev

Reply View | 2 replies
- brundolf 4 days ago
  
  It's not about being flummoxed, it's about being annoyed enough not to give it a chance
  How much less adoption would Rust have gotten if it looked like OCaml instead of C++?
  Its adopters are not stupid, they could have figured out alien syntax if they were already convinced of the benefit. But selling someone on an entirely new substrate for their professional work is a huge ask. You need to make it as immediately-palatable as possible, or they'll just keep on sailing without giving it a chance.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  touisteur 3 days ago
  
  As much as I wish the world to be different, I've heard so much whining about the Ada language's not-C-likeness that I tend to agree with you.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
NooneAtAll3 4 days ago

> Rust mimicked C++
if anything, it didn't mimick /enough/

Reply View | 0 replies

dr_kiszonka 4 days ago

I really like the idea. I could see some of my academic collaborators use something like this because it has features typically only supported when working with plaintext. A lot of academics do not love working with LaTeX.

But I would push back a bit against the UX and it being a "better Word". It is not immediately clear from looking at the website whether you support tracking changes. If you support editing Word documents, why aren't basic editing features, like font selection, size and weight, exposed in the UI. (I am viewing it on mobile Chrome and I might have missed it because your page doesn't support pinch to Zoom.)

You don't have to make it look like Word but it must be designed to facilitate common interaction patterns needed for working with Word documents.

(If you are building it on top of VSCode you could use its multiplayer features, which could be a good sell. )

Reply View 0 replies

sails 3 days ago

Figure out how to make it uncompromisingly productive for power users and then dumb it down, not the other way around way around

Reply View 0 replies