61–70 of 118 posts
If all you need is to diff documents (Word, Excel, PPT, or arbitrary PDFs) then I can't recommend https://draftable.com/compare enough. It's an amazing tool. Granted, you need to do merges manually with just a diff tool, but that's not usually the bottleneck.
1. You have a fantastic product
2. Many potential users won't accept to have their documents stored "in the cloud" (even though those same users share those same documents by email with zero security, all the time)
3. Offer a stand alone version and sell a licence (or a rent, think the former Google Search Appliance)
4. Charge an arm and a leg for it -- think Oracle pricing
5. Get rich!
Many others have said it already, but I'll say it again: 1. You have a fantastic product 2. Many potential users won't accept to have their documents stored "in the cloud" (even though those same users share those same documents by email with zero security, all the time) 3. Offer a stand alone version and sell a licence (or a rent, think the former Google Search Appliance) 4. Charge an arm and a leg for it -- think O…
How big do you think the intersection is of people who can use git and people who want to use Microsoft Word?
It includes at least me :) I switched to Latex for writing my second master thesis because I wanted to use version control but Word is far more easier to deal with when the document include unicode character outside the BMP. So I really wanted Word + git from that time. Also when collaborating for writing a paper with Word, version control can be a huge help.
Slight aside (since LibreOffice != Word, and XML diffs are still horribly messy): If you save your LibreOffice documents in flat XML format, (e.g. fods, fodt instead of ods, odt), placing them under version control becomes slightly less annoying — the diffs become at least _potentially_ human readable. See also: http://blog.riemann.cc/2013/04/23/versioning-of-openoffice-l... https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/globa…
Congratulations on your launch! Other folks have provided a bunch of commentary on the validity of your idea, so I won't address that. BUT: if this is a good idea, your pricing is far too low for a niche product like this. $10 (or 10 quid) is too low a monthly fee for pretty much any product marketed as a business product. 10 per seat per month is probably also too low, but would be a better starting point. Likely ob…
Plugging these patio11 posts because a)they might be helpful if OP hasn't read them and b)even if OP has, somebody else here might not and they're pretty much evergreen: The Black Art of SaaS Pricing: https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/saas_pric... Doubling Saas Revenue by Changing the Pricing Model: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/08/13/doubling-saas-revenue/ Selling To The Fortune 500, Government, And…
The main limitation with Git is that it only works with
plain text (think Windows Notepad). I have seen authors
resort to plain text or markdown in order to take
advantage of Git, but this means losing all of your rich
formatting such as images and fonts. This is usually too
much of a sacrifice for companies as formatting needs to
be reapplied with each publication, which is very
time-consuming and prone to errors.
For plain text, sure, for markdown, nope.
"...and fonts"
Sure, but formatting can be applied after. With markdown, it supports HTML so you could event apply custom formatting inline, if you really wanted to do something so dirty.
"This is usually too much of a sacrifice for companies as formatting needs to be reapplied with each publication, which is very time-consuming and prone to errors."
Why not solve this problem? Why not make markdown more accessible to those wanting to use Word? Make something that looks like word, but in reality takes markdown and renders it using some flexible settings file?
I personally quite like markdown, to me it represents a minimal, future proof language. I would actually change a few things about markdown to make it more useful in an academic setting. Issues for me are referencing structure, diagrams, embedding content (at the position) and plots. Those things fixed, I would never look back at LaTeX or Word again.
One thing I would like to see remain, is the plain-text readability and being able to process it line-by-line without having to remember anything about the previous line.
Good luck with this venture, but if you're wanting to take a pivot, let me know :)
Firstly, great job in getting that mess to play well with Git! The main limitation with Git is that it only works with plain text (think Windows Notepad). I have seen authors resort to plain text or markdown in order to take advantage of Git, but this means losing all of your rich formatting such as images and fonts. This is usually too much of a sacrifice for companies as formatting needs to be reapplied with each p…
Anything other than Word is a non-starter for 99% of law firms (and the other 1% is still on WordPerfect). Markdown is awesome and I use it for my notes files and all kinds of things but contracts, settlement docs, pleadings, motions, etc etc all exist strictly and only in Word. And probably 50% of those are still .doc format, which was left behind more than a decade ago in Word 2007.
This product, if it works, will be a God-send for firms like mine (small to medium litigation shops that don't use full document assembly software with built-in version control like the AmLaw 100 firms. And it looks like even those firms might profit from this solution if it plays well with their customer style sheets and macros.
I wish it were different, but sadly the state of legal tech is mired in the late '90s.