Hi Phillip, Excerpts from Philipp's message of Mon Apr 12 02:17:57 +0530 2010: > I don't try to put down your work, but it's not something I'd fall for. > It's too web2.0ey for me, too much attention hog, too much bragging. > It's very well possible that I wouldn't have tried sup with that website. I understand what you're saying. I didn't do any of the design - I should mention this upfront. I'm not a design person at all. I just thought some other Creative Commons licensed work was good and thought I could modify it to benefit some other project. > The JS thing with description and changing image is a nice idea, but I'd > either not click it (because I'd read the site first and had to assume > it leads me to another one) or tried to open it in another tab and > wondered why it didn't work or I'd click it on purpose, assuming it > would lead me to another page and would have been negatively surprised > because of the little bit of bragging information I got. The tone does seem like it's a little pretentious, yes. Any suggestions on how the content can be changed will be addressed. The fact that the link is > The gmail featured so prominently would have put me off as well, I'd > assume it's written mainly for gmail. I only put it up as I wrote the content earlier and many people mentioned it helped them get started with sup. While IMAP is supported out of the box, most people use OfflineImap, and msmtp support is not that significantly documented. For me, it's about conversion ratio. If n users come on to the site, and m users finally end up installing and using sup, we need to make that ratio better. Since most people use the IMAP setup - having the instructions for that more prominently featured on the page will help them have a more gratifying experience. I speak very strongly about "gratification". If user X comes on, downloads, installs and has to fish around just to get started, then there's a good chance he/she will give up and move on with their lives, unless they are _actively_ looking for a good email client in which case the website wouldn't have mattered anyways. > I don't claim the current sup page is great, it also lacks in a few > areas. I focused mainly on the negative aspects of your page, but it has > a few improvements over the current page as well, mainly the links at > the top, which make navigation to other parts of the page a bit easier. I don't have any issue with it either. I can recount my own experience when I started out with sup. I saw the sup website. Thought "oh, another console email client" and moved on, but bookmarked it on delicious before leaving. I used to use mutt and evolution at this point in time. The pain points got to me and I finally ended up trying sup, and had to figure out a good deal of things on my own - notably how to get offlineimap, msmtp and sup to play together. If I had seen a more appealing and in-your-face website, I might have considered giving it a bit more interest. I guess it's not about looking good as much as it is about standing out. There are a lot of other projects and mail clients over there, and a more memorable and appealing design will make people give it the attention I feel sup deserves. Then again, I feel compelled to inform that I didn't do much of the design. If the community feels that this isn't a step in the right direction, it would be perfectly fine. Thanks, Anirudh -- http://anirudhsanjeev.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk