3 ms·

Appreciate the feedback! Nailing landing page copy is tough. So you'd like to see something along the lines of "in Jira you'd do it like XYZ, in Kitemaker it'd

by kevsim 4y ago

Appreciate the feedback! Nailing landing page copy is tough. So you'd like to see something along the lines of "in Jira you'd do it like XYZ, in Kitemaker it'd look like ABC"?

twohaibei 4y ago
You could even go a step further and play the SEO game by creating landing pages for all the comparisons. Ie. vs Trello, vs Jira, vs Github Issues. Zapier did it (and automated) with success.
- kevsim 4y ago
  Thanks for the tip! Zapier's SEO prowess is awe inspiring.
- HelloNurse 4y ago
  Far from a time-wasting "SEO game", comparison pages would be highly informative content (an unavoidably detailed and accurate product description) and a very good advertisement (showing and not merely telling how and why whatever one's currently using or considering is inferior).
magicalhippo 4y ago
In the article you say We should be focusing on what we plan to deliver to our users, regardless of the size. This is at the center of “outcome” before “output” What I'm struggling with is seeing exactly how tracking a huge, "fluffy" outcome would be an improvement. For example, at my work we recently got a fairly big customer. As part of that, we will need to integrate with about 30 of their systems as well as implement a new API for them to send data to us. Reading what you've written naively, it seems to me we should have a single "Integrate customer Foo" task to track. Without further details, I struggle to figure out to what degree this would be an improvement to what we're currently doing, which is using JIRA issues for high-level stuff like "integrate with invoicing system A", with a bunch of sub-issues for the details. It could very well be we're missing out on something amazing, but without any concrete examples to compare to what we're doing, it's hard to determine. At least for me.

3 ms·

Appreciate the feedback! Nailing landing page copy is tough. So you'd like to see something along the lines of "in Jira you'd do it like XYZ, in Kitemaker it'd

by kevsim 4y ago

Appreciate the feedback! Nailing landing page copy is tough. So you'd like to see something along the lines of "in Jira you'd do it like XYZ, in Kitemaker it'd look like ABC"?

twohaibei 4y ago
You could even go a step further and play the SEO game by creating landing pages for all the comparisons. Ie. vs Trello, vs Jira, vs Github Issues. Zapier did it (and automated) with success.
- kevsim 4y ago
  Thanks for the tip! Zapier's SEO prowess is awe inspiring.
- HelloNurse 4y ago
  Far from a time-wasting "SEO game", comparison pages would be highly informative content (an unavoidably detailed and accurate product description) and a very good advertisement (showing and not merely telling how and why whatever one's currently using or considering is inferior).
magicalhippo 4y ago
In the article you say We should be focusing on what we plan to deliver to our users, regardless of the size. This is at the center of “outcome” before “output” What I'm struggling with is seeing exactly how tracking a huge, "fluffy" outcome would be an improvement. For example, at my work we recently got a fairly big customer. As part of that, we will need to integrate with about 30 of their systems as well as implement a new API for them to send data to us. Reading what you've written naively, it seems to me we should have a single "Integrate customer Foo" task to track. Without further details, I struggle to figure out to what degree this would be an improvement to what we're currently doing, which is using JIRA issues for high-level stuff like "integrate with invoicing system A", with a bunch of sub-issues for the details. It could very well be we're missing out on something amazing, but without any concrete examples to compare to what we're doing, it's hard to determine. At least for me.