3 ms·
Sorry, but that's just nonsense. If you want to actually sell something, I would expect to have at least a summary of main selling points right there, at the fr
by janoc 10y ago
Sorry, but that's just nonsense. If you want to actually sell something, I would expect to have at least a summary of main selling points right there, at the front page.
Expecting the potential buyer to dig through the manual to even learn what the software actually is beyond the "emacs like editor" is ridiculous. For me it just means it is yet another editor for obscure OSes (OS/2 ?), one of thousands on the market, and that I am not going to consider spending money on it when the authors can't be even bothered to tell me why should I do so. The product could be technically superior than everything else and the best thing since sliced bread, but it means little if you don't tell people about it. That's marketing 101.
Compare with e.g. SublimeText website - the key stuff is right there, even animated (!):
https://www.sublimetext.com/ https://www.sublimetext.com/
Or Atom:
https://atom.io/ https://atom.io/
Or even Emacs:
https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/ https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
Even Vim's web site starts with a short summary:
http://www.vim.org/ http://www.vim.org/
Unfortunately, many project websites (both open source and commercial) are like that - front page filled with jargon and random stuff but you won't find a short paragraph summarizing what the software actually is for and its main features for people not already familiar with it.
- notalaser 10y ago> If you want to actually sell something Perhaps its authors want to achieve other objectives than just sell something, or think it's more appropriate for their users and target public. There's certainly the possibility that they aren't really sure how selling things on the Internet works. However, I'm willing to entertain the possibility that the guys who've been selling this for 32 years know what works for them better than someone who just found out about their editor. And frankly, design aside, I like Epsilon's website a lot more than SublimeText's. The front page doesn't offer any useful information about the "key stuff" for a programmer's editor (is it properly extensible, through an extension language? is it easy to interface with other programs? maybe has some added goodies, like a hex editing mode?). Besides, it's entirely devoid of any useful information besides these 7 features and 6 animations. There seems to be no way for me to find out if ST has any features for e.g. remote editing or VCS integration other than downloading the evaluation version. Where's the manual? Where's at least a longer list of supported features? I equally don't understand the fixation for animation. It takes less time to find the Epsilon manual on their website and skim it than it takes to watch the six (confusing, since there's no on-screen keyboard!) animations that take up the whole screen. I understand its value as an enhanced form of illustration, but I'd appreciate it more if it would enhance the written, precise information, rather than replace it.
- rbanffy 10y ago> or think it's more appropriate for their users and target public. I wonder who would that be. Mind you, programmers who shop for an editor are usually very knowledgeable about what they want. They know how to extend Eclipse or Emacs or Atom or VS Code or whatever they have ever laid their hands on.