Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

bold.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#31

Post by eterm »

King-Aaron wrote: post #26
ux-app wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that complicated. The second paragraph. > 'Bold aims to provide the best experience for reading and writing long-form content at work so that your best ideas can be heard.' Seems like an unique and interesting product. My work doesn't involve writing 'long-form content', so I'm not in the target market but I didn't find it hard to work out what it does.

So... Is it a blogging engine? A notepad app? A ... ?

I think it's what I've started calling "trendy pencils".

Hemmingway etc. attract because of a person's belief that just given the right tool and environment they'll be able to express all those wonderful ideas they've had but have been so far unable to express.

This is not unlike believing that they'll have a rash of creativity and be able to express themselves if they buy a set of blackwings and a moleskin.

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#32

Post by ux-app »

King-Aaron wrote: post #26
ux-app wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that complicated. The second paragraph. > 'Bold aims to provide the best experience for reading and writing long-form content at work so that your best ideas can be heard.' Seems like an unique and interesting product. My work doesn't involve writing 'long-form content', so I'm not in the target market but I didn't find it hard to work out what it does.

So... Is it a blogging engine? A notepad app? A ... ?

FFS. I hate snark. Developing a product is hard. did you take even 5 mins to read the post. If you did then you wouldn't have any issues with understanding the product and the value it's trying to add. I didn't. And I'm not exactly Einstein.

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#33

Post by King-Aaron »

ux-app wrote: post #32
King-Aaron wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... Is it a blogging engine? A notepad app? A ... ?

FFS. I hate snark. Developing a product is hard. did you take even 5 mins to read the post. If you did then you wouldn't have any issues with understanding the product and the value it's trying to add. I didn't. And I'm not exactly Einstein.

I read it numerous times. And nowhere does it mention whether it's a web app in the browser, a standalone app for the desktop, if it's a social/sharing site, etc. The page discusses lots of features, lots of solutions to problems which they don't define the problem of, etc. It's one thing to assume what a product is, but that's not good marketing.

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#35

Post by noir_lord »

davidbyttow wrote: post #22
jdavis703 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm clocking in at 5.1MB which is still huge, but 4.4MB are from images alone. However their biggest image is a 2.8MB 24-bit monster PNG. That really could be a JPEG, with moderate compression it could come in at only a few hundred kilobyes I think.

Thanks for the heads up guys! We spent a good amount of time compressing our blocking bundle size (html, JS, CSS), which actually is JS for the entire app, not just that page. Certainly have more work to do, but given the amount of code, our JS/CSS is pretty low. I just compressed the large image and it dropped to ~430KB. Meanwhile, the other large asset is the animated GIF, which I suppose we could switch to a loopi…

https://github.com/tjko/jpegoptim

https://github.com/Kjuly/pngcrush

You can use both from the cli as part of a build server/push to production.

jpegoptim in particular can make very good savings on lots of image types.

Example: http://i.imgur.com/Q4ggKXt.png

No appreciable loss in quality certainly for this use case.

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#36

Post by mksaunders »

King-Aaron wrote: post #33
ux-app wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FFS. I hate snark. Developing a product is hard. did you take even 5 mins to read the post. If you did then you wouldn't have any issues with understanding the product and the value it's trying to add. I didn't. And I'm not exactly Einstein.

I read it numerous times. And nowhere does it mention whether it's a web app in the browser, a standalone app for the desktop, if it's a social/sharing site, etc. The page discusses lots of features, lots of solutions to problems which they don't define the problem of, etc. It's one thing to assume what a product is, but that's not good marketing.

Agreed. I've spent 18 years as a computer journalist and I still can't make head or tail of exactly what "Bold" is. Really vague description on that page. Certainly hasn't encouraged me to investigate or write about it...

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#37

Post by thedaemon »

jdavis703 wrote: post #17
guywithabike wrote: post #4

This basic post with two images (four counting the logo and author avatar) clocks in at 30 requests and a plump 6.10 MB. Bold!

I'm clocking in at 5.1MB which is still huge, but 4.4MB are from images alone. However their biggest image is a 2.8MB 24-bit monster PNG. That really could be a JPEG, with moderate compression it could come in at only a few hundred kilobyes I think.

I understand the large file size is a problem, but please don't suggest anyone use JPEG for images. It's a terrible format and I wish it would go away. It ruins artwork. I see the developer changed it to a JPEG and named it *.GIF. Weird, at any rate the problem is the large size of the image 2560x1600 @24. Even on my Surface Pro the image is far too large. Does anyone have a link the the original PNG? It would make a nice wallpaper. Also, anyone have credit for the artist?

Re: Bold: Make Your Words Stand Out

#38

Post by jdavis703 »

thedaemon wrote: post #37
jdavis703 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm clocking in at 5.1MB which is still huge, but 4.4MB are from images alone. However their biggest image is a 2.8MB 24-bit monster PNG. That really could be a JPEG, with moderate compression it could come in at only a few hundred kilobyes I think.

I understand the large file size is a problem, but please don't suggest anyone use JPEG for images. It's a terrible format and I wish it would go away. It ruins artwork. I see the developer changed it to a JPEG and named it *.GIF. Weird, at any rate the problem is the large size of the image 2560x1600 @24. Even on my Surface Pro the image is far too large. Does anyone have a link the the original PNG? It would make a…

JPEG doesn't ruin art any more than MP3 ruins music. I'd never send a compressed JPEG to a printer, just like I wouldn't send an MP3 to be mastered. But most users won't be able to tell the image quality difference if you fine tune the compression level, but they will notice a slow loading page.
Post reply on HN