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

Dropbox Paper

dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 214 posts

Re: Dropbox Paper

#141

Post by TuringTest »

wodenokoto wrote: post #52
akeck wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been playing with passing markdown+css file+image tree to: pandoc {options} -H file.css --self-contained. It base64 encodes the images directly into the HTML5. The css in file.css is wrapped in and is inlined in the header. The result is a fat HTML file with all the basic bits to make an article included. Exact line: pandoc --standalone --toc -V "toctitle:'Title'" --self-contained --to html5 -H article.css -o fi…

For the longest time (5 or 6 years, way longer than Electron) I have been puzzled as to why there didn't exist a document format for offline websites/apps, that are basically a zip file of HTML+CSS+images+javascript. That way you could build simple, easily distributable multimedia documents and web apps.

IIRC Mozilla created such file format, and MS Explorer has its own proprietary version. They didn't caught on, though.

Re: Dropbox Paper

#142

Post by TuringTest »

wodenokoto wrote: post #52
akeck wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been playing with passing markdown+css file+image tree to: pandoc {options} -H file.css --self-contained. It base64 encodes the images directly into the HTML5. The css in file.css is wrapped in and is inlined in the header. The result is a fat HTML file with all the basic bits to make an article included. Exact line: pandoc --standalone --toc -V "toctitle:'Title'" --self-contained --to html5 -H article.css -o fi…

For the longest time (5 or 6 years, way longer than Electron) I have been puzzled as to why there didn't exist a document format for offline websites/apps, that are basically a zip file of HTML+CSS+images+javascript. That way you could build simple, easily distributable multimedia documents and web apps.

IIRC Mozilla created such file format, and MS Explorer has its own proprietary version. They didn't caught on, though.

Re: Dropbox Paper

#143

Post by jest3r1 »

It's an operating theatre though.

These and other features may require our systems to access, store and scan Your Stuff. You give us permission to do those things, and this permission extends to our affiliates and trusted third parties we work with.

So, in order to work on collaborative documents, I give Dropbox, Dropbox affiliates and trusted third parties access? Who are these people?

Others working for Dropbox. Dropbox uses certain trusted third parties (for example providers of customer support and IT services) to help us provide, improve, protect and promote our Services. These third parties will access your information only to perform tasks on our behalf ... https://www.dropbox.com/terms

Maybe not so great for business data privacy compliance then?

I know it's not just Dropbox, but the idea that I'm creating business content in some pseudo-document format that an unspecified number of people, including outsourced IT, have access to is unsettling.

It's a gold mine for Dropbox of course. They control the document format, making it really easy to data mine. They know exactly what everyone is working on. Your team spends hours planning bigger, brighter ideas, and someone is watching.

And they hold us hostage forever. Export is .docx only and the export formatting is atrocious, non usable.

What ever happened to encryption for cloud-based services? We're giving all our data away.

--

Now, with all that said, Dropbox Paper does solve a number of problems businesses face. The bare bones editor, overall simplicity, and elimination of the traditional file format makes it really easy to use, especially when collaborating with folks that may not create documents every day.

Paper docs are giving Basecamp, non-developer Confluence Pages (JIRA) and web hosting at our office a run for the money. Because it doesn't feel bloated.

Plus, there's too many options for these types of business productivity tools at the moment. Simpler is better in this regard, as navigating all of the options, and training people, is a project nobody really wants to commit to. At least not at our office.

That makes Dropbox Paper a good fit for something.

Re: Dropbox Paper

#145

Post by master5o1 »

wodenokoto wrote: post #46
ungzd wrote: post #21

After looking at landing page, it's completely unclear what it is. Powerpoint with comments? Pinterest for enterprise? Google Wave with Material design? "Create, review, organize" — but even Quake level editor is about creating, reviewing and organizing.

It's Google docs but instead of being aimed at producing documents for prints, it is aimed at producing document for online consumption (multimedia) These documents can be used for notes about ideas, documentation, business plans, etc., etc. Kinda like webpages, but with an easy-to-write interface, collaborative chat, and easy user access management. Honestly, I thought the landing page showed that quite well. It did…

>It's Google docs but instead of being aimed at producing documents for prints, it is aimed at producing document for online consumption (multimedia)

Pretty weird to name it after a printed medium if it is not primarily meant for printed media.

Re: Dropbox Paper

#146

Post by JumpCrisscross »

brianpgordon wrote: post #33
ungzd wrote: post #21

After looking at landing page, it's completely unclear what it is. Powerpoint with comments? Pinterest for enterprise? Google Wave with Material design? "Create, review, organize" — but even Quake level editor is about creating, reviewing and organizing.

Google Wave is exactly what I thought of. Like Wave, this is a polished, high-quality, sexy solution for a problem that simply doesn't exist. People are going to ooh and aah over it, and then keep using Slack and Google Docs. s/Wave/Paper in this Wave obituary from 2010: > Wave brought together elements of instant messaging, e-mail, microblogging, and collaborative editing in a single service that strongly emphasized…

> this is a polished, high-quality, sexy solution for a problem that simply doesn't exist

At a certain level I wonder if this, like Google X, isn't more a recruiting tool than an actual product. Something to say "we do sexy things here".

Re: Dropbox Paper

#147

Post by sjy »

nine_k wrote: post #120
ktta wrote: post #30

Another closed file format. I think we're are in need of a lightweight document format, which is more complex than markdown, but needn't be as complex as docx. A quick google shows some results which look like pet projects of small business which have obviously failed (since I've never heard of them before) All of these new document formats that are pushed by big companies (some are really great I actually love using…

One of the problems is that people want different things from a "simple document format". Some want rendering-agnostic structure, like Wiki / Markdown / Org mode, that emphasizes structure and text, with things like links, tags, etc. Other want to print centered headers on level 1, and left-aligned for level 2, and body text with a particular font, with fragments in a different color, and pictures with text flowing a…

I'm pretty happy with pandoc markdown, compiled to PDF or HTML using LaTeX or CSS for styling, which achieves both of those design goals. But I also want to compose my first draft in a WYSIWYG editor and send it to non-technical users for editing (with tracked changes), so I do almost all of my writing in Word. It's the user interface, not the file format, that I find limiting.

Re: Dropbox Paper

#150

Post by enobrev »

isarat wrote: post #57

Initially when Paper was launched I tried and left the product quickly. I was using Quip a lot for my work as it's more developer friendly and easy to manage. I use Paper more and more these days with my team though we are into Google for Work. Google Docs is a tough cookie and an office replica. Those who are in to markdown, they would hardly go back to anything else for formatting. The only catch with markdown is a…

I've been using it since October, and I agree with all your points.

The biggest draw for me has been how quickly I can throw together a relatively well formatted doc without thinking much about it. Using inline markdown for headers and basic text formatting is fantastic, and I agree that the table implementation is the best I've used with any markdown-based tool.

I really appreciate the inline google maps, which has been great for planning trips. One welcome addition would be the ability to include a single map with multiple "pins", as having multiple maps on a single page can get pretty untenable as a doc grows. I've tried using links from custom google "My Maps", but that doesn't work (yet?).

I'd love to be able to add other extensions, like yelp review lookups or gist lookups. Maybe not as embeds but as "paste lookups", where pasting a url would create a pre-formatted paragraph or table in the doc (just like how pasting a map url embeds the map).

Post reply on HN