5 ms·

1) Generally ignore, it doesn't matter. If you're prioritizing your customers and they're prioritizing copying you, they'll always be second to you. 2) Despite

1) Generally ignore, it doesn't matter. If you're prioritizing your customers and they're prioritizing copying you, they'll always be second to you. 2) Despite the above, call them out publicly. A YC company ripped us off blatantly and we decided to call them out. It will hamper their image and make people aware of what they're doing. Evidence: https://twitter.com/Bensign/status/1512110156275986433 https://twitter.com/Bensign/status/1512110156275986433

baggsie 4y ago
Generic design system looks generic shocker!
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  This. There's only so many ways you can design a graph, table, and rule editor. The icons just seem to be from two packs, so they likely picked out the most appropriate icon for the action, and when you have limited icon packs you'll likely converge on similar icons. Notably, in a reply where they're calling out the similar icons, only one is the same while the other two are different, the only similarity that one of them has a graph.
  - digerata 4y ago
    I have to disagree with both comments on this... That was my first thought as well. But looking at the screenshots in the Twitter post, it goes beyond design systems. Structurally, it's the same. Layout, it's the same. Purpose, it's the same.
    - mynameisvlad 4y ago
      I don’t really buy it. There’s only so many logical ways to layout a graph, breadcrumbs, and table. If the breadcrumbs perform an action, which they seem to do, then you’ll want them center to emphasize that. That’s just basic UX design. I could argue they copied the query builder from dozens of different sites because they all look identical. It’s a query builder, there’s only a few ways to design and implement one. The tables straight up are just standard design tables. They could’ve come from Bootstrap at how plain they look. The only thing they have in common in terms of the things they show is costs, which, I mean for two tools used to keep track of cloud spending, seems like a given. The copy is completely different even if the purpose is the same, and “slicing and dicing data” is a go to phrase in the industry. We used the phrase all the time when developing a graphing tool. Nothing in that Twitter post is unique. It’s what I, and I’m sure many others would converge on for any sort of tool that interacts with graphed data. Especially for two tools in the same space, there’s only so many ways to show people their cloud costs. If anything, both companies just have extremely generic looking and feeling UIs.
      - dingosity 4y ago
        Um. Their marketing copy... the words used to describe things and the order in which they're laid out? You think that's GENERIC?
        mynameisvlad 4y ago
        Please show me the exact marketing copy that is the same. They use different words to describe slicing and dicing data, which as I already said is an extremely common term in the industry. For two companies doing the same niche and relatively simple thing, I would certainly think that there would be a lot of similarities. As I have said like half a dozen times now, there’s only so many ways you can show cloud costs. It’s not like this is some innovative space, it’s just showing costs over time on a graph and table. If I were to clean room design an interface for this problem, I would certainly have the same sort of design, layout and copy as these two. And yes, all of those things are generic, for the reasons I’ve given. Do you have any actual response other than being incredulous that someone has a different opinion than you?
        ipaddr 4y ago
        Pretty much generic nonsense text. The one of the left didn't optimize like the one on the right.
- welly 4y ago
  Nice try, Cloudthread. Yes, the design is fairly generic but if you can't see that someone ripped off someone here then you must be trying a bit too hard to not see it.
  - ipaddr 4y ago
    I'm trying but both looks like countless other soul-less corporate sites.
    - goolz 4y ago
      Ya, not sure how they do not get your point… regardless of that fact, it is a completely uninspired design and it’s not hard to imagine this is some stock Tailwind UI component. Yes, they are wrong, but this isn’t some revolutionary stuff here. Let’s call a spade a spade.
- StratusBen 4y ago
  ...actually the team openly admitted to copying the site directly after we called them out publicly. Here is the direct message of them apologizing: https://imgur.com/a/OlNJ5U4 https://imgur.com/a/OlNJ5U4
- wellthisisgreat 4y ago
  Yeah I am with you the screenshots look like some bootstrap or whatever generic CSS framework of the day there is
bsuvc 4y ago
> it doesn't matter I've heard in the past that it can hurt your SEO, but I don't know that firsthand. Is there a risk that google considers your site to be spam if it detects mirrors of the same content?
- me_bx 4y ago
  > Is there a risk that google considers your site to be spam if it detects mirrors of the same content? I read about this happening a while ago, as the content thieves set an earlier publication date in their cloned pages metadata...
- chomp 4y ago
  Yes, it does affect SEO, assuming the other party duplicated content and URL structure, the OP was not clear on this matter. Just HTML duplication won't (shouldn't) do anything. Google's bots will see 2 pages with similar content and URL structure, and make a judgment call as to which one is canonical, and present that one in search results as the authoritative source. And no, the methods Google uses to determine the canonical source are not known, and in my experience, don't often make much sense to us humans.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
purpleblue 4y ago
I don't see the rip off. I think it's about 60% similar but your design isn't special at all and very generic. The idea that someone "ripped you off" is a huge stretch to me.
- d1sxeyes 4y ago
  I think the 'slice and dice' seals it, and it's right they apologise. Otherwise, yes I agree, it's not a particularly innovative design, and 'graph with breadcrumbs and a datatable', and 'SQL query builder with madlibs type interface' are pretty generic, the implementations here are nice, but look very similar to Airtable/Notion/Coda, I don't think there's a huge amount of originality there. On the line between 'inspired by' and 'copied from', I think.

baggsie 4y ago

Generic design system looks generic shocker!

mynameisvlad 4y ago
This. There's only so many ways you can design a graph, table, and rule editor. The icons just seem to be from two packs, so they likely picked out the most appropriate icon for the action, and when you have limited icon packs you'll likely converge on similar icons. Notably, in a reply where they're calling out the similar icons, only one is the same while the other two are different, the only similarity that one of them has a graph.
- digerata 4y ago
  I have to disagree with both comments on this... That was my first thought as well. But looking at the screenshots in the Twitter post, it goes beyond design systems. Structurally, it's the same. Layout, it's the same. Purpose, it's the same.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    I don’t really buy it. There’s only so many logical ways to layout a graph, breadcrumbs, and table. If the breadcrumbs perform an action, which they seem to do, then you’ll want them center to emphasize that. That’s just basic UX design. I could argue they copied the query builder from dozens of different sites because they all look identical. It’s a query builder, there’s only a few ways to design and implement one. The tables straight up are just standard design tables. They could’ve come from Bootstrap at how plain they look. The only thing they have in common in terms of the things they show is costs, which, I mean for two tools used to keep track of cloud spending, seems like a given. The copy is completely different even if the purpose is the same, and “slicing and dicing data” is a go to phrase in the industry. We used the phrase all the time when developing a graphing tool. Nothing in that Twitter post is unique. It’s what I, and I’m sure many others would converge on for any sort of tool that interacts with graphed data. Especially for two tools in the same space, there’s only so many ways to show people their cloud costs. If anything, both companies just have extremely generic looking and feeling UIs.
    - dingosity 4y ago
      Um. Their marketing copy... the words used to describe things and the order in which they're laid out? You think that's GENERIC?
      - mynameisvlad 4y ago
        Please show me the exact marketing copy that is the same. They use different words to describe slicing and dicing data, which as I already said is an extremely common term in the industry. For two companies doing the same niche and relatively simple thing, I would certainly think that there would be a lot of similarities. As I have said like half a dozen times now, there’s only so many ways you can show cloud costs. It’s not like this is some innovative space, it’s just showing costs over time on a graph and table. If I were to clean room design an interface for this problem, I would certainly have the same sort of design, layout and copy as these two. And yes, all of those things are generic, for the reasons I’ve given. Do you have any actual response other than being incredulous that someone has a different opinion than you?
      - ipaddr 4y ago
        Pretty much generic nonsense text. The one of the left didn't optimize like the one on the right.
welly 4y ago
Nice try, Cloudthread. Yes, the design is fairly generic but if you can't see that someone ripped off someone here then you must be trying a bit too hard to not see it.
- ipaddr 4y ago
  I'm trying but both looks like countless other soul-less corporate sites.
  - goolz 4y ago
    Ya, not sure how they do not get your point… regardless of that fact, it is a completely uninspired design and it’s not hard to imagine this is some stock Tailwind UI component. Yes, they are wrong, but this isn’t some revolutionary stuff here. Let’s call a spade a spade.
StratusBen 4y ago
...actually the team openly admitted to copying the site directly after we called them out publicly. Here is the direct message of them apologizing: https://imgur.com/a/OlNJ5U4 https://imgur.com/a/OlNJ5U4
wellthisisgreat 4y ago
Yeah I am with you the screenshots look like some bootstrap or whatever generic CSS framework of the day there is

bsuvc 4y ago

> it doesn't matter I've heard in the past that it can hurt your SEO, but I don't know that firsthand. Is there a risk that google considers your site to be spam if it detects mirrors of the same content?

me_bx 4y ago
> Is there a risk that google considers your site to be spam if it detects mirrors of the same content? I read about this happening a while ago, as the content thieves set an earlier publication date in their cloned pages metadata...
chomp 4y ago
Yes, it does affect SEO, assuming the other party duplicated content and URL structure, the OP was not clear on this matter. Just HTML duplication won't (shouldn't) do anything. Google's bots will see 2 pages with similar content and URL structure, and make a judgment call as to which one is canonical, and present that one in search results as the authoritative source. And no, the methods Google uses to determine the canonical source are not known, and in my experience, don't often make much sense to us humans.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

purpleblue 4y ago

I don't see the rip off. I think it's about 60% similar but your design isn't special at all and very generic. The idea that someone "ripped you off" is a huge stretch to me.

d1sxeyes 4y ago
I think the 'slice and dice' seals it, and it's right they apologise. Otherwise, yes I agree, it's not a particularly innovative design, and 'graph with breadcrumbs and a datatable', and 'SQL query builder with madlibs type interface' are pretty generic, the implementations here are nice, but look very similar to Airtable/Notion/Coda, I don't think there's a huge amount of originality there. On the line between 'inspired by' and 'copied from', I think.