Live data from Hacker News

Pitch: Collaborative presentation software for teams

pitch.com

11–20 of 123 posts

Re: Pitch: Collaborative presentation software for teams

#11
So I REALLY don’t mean this to be cynical, but: other than this clearly being a beautiful product, and I guess the simple fact that it’s just not a Google product, what exactly does this bring to the table that Google slides doesn’t already do?

I say this as a guy who spends a lot of time in Google slides, both on my own presentations as well as collaborating on group ones, and it works pretty much perfectly. If I were to switch from it, I need something that absolutely crushes it in some way, but looking at the landing page for this product, nothing is particularly popping out to show it being all that different than what I already use in Slides, which is also included in my company email along with sheets and docs.

What am I missing?

Re: Pitch: Collaborative presentation software for teams

#15
post #13

So is anyone using this ? How is this better than google slides apart from the video collaboration ?

I'm using it. Enjoy it so far. Unfortunately, that's my first tool for building the pitch deck. Not sure how it's better than Google's

Re: Pitch: Collaborative presentation software for teams

#17
post #7

For anyone that's expecting all those fancy animations that you see in this post and on the landing pages: They are not really in the product.

I think this is a deeper point than it appears at first, there’s been a trend towards the democratization of software, e.g., Figma is easier to use than Photoshop, mobile software is simpler than desktop, Google Docs is simpler than Excel. But the high-end just continues to be moving in the other direction, in the case of the example here, bleeding-edge design is moving into the 3D space (my guess is Cinema 4D for the 3D elements on Pitch's homepage), and 3D packages are an order of magnitude more complex than either Photoshop or Excel. I.e., instead of taking successful simpler software's lead, the high-end is actually getting more complicated.

For awhile now I’ve been predicting a moat forming in creative professions between people using high-end (usually desktop) software, and the low-end (either mobile or mobile compatible). Historically, this was never the case, e.g., all designers used Photoshop, all music producers used Logic or similar. Now with truly viable low-end alternatives like the Affinity Suite, and Final Cut deliberately moving down market, or the absolutely rich audio ecosystem on iOS, it’s almost like two “classes” of creator are being formed.

Presumably choice is a good thing, but I think more and more the work of people focusing on the high-end is going to stand out from the rest, and career-wise be more in demand.

Post reply on HN