Hey! Cool site - I think this is very helpful. The competitive landscape in this space is bewildering. This looks like a thoughtfully designed and fair comparison site. (Coming from a Notion dev)
My bit of feedback would be to disclose how this site is affiliated with AmpleNote in a more direct way. While I think the association might detract from the appearance of fairness initially, I think it’d be better to stick an ethics disclosure in the footer than leave users to stumble into it in the FAQ or by following links to your company homepage.
Also, I noticed that the mailto link to the “corrections@…” in the FAQ is broken - it links to https://mailto:corrections@noteapps.info/
Thank you, I’ve updated the link! Putting a disclosure in the footer seems like a good idea, don’t suppose you have seen any prior art for language that is used to concisely convey such info in a similar situation? I will mull possible language myself and try to figure something out.
The first thing that comes to mind for me is Jepsen, a database correctness consultancy that publishes both independent and funded analyses. Jepsen leads each analysis with with a short introduction and a link to the ethics page. Example funded analysis: https://jepsen.io/analyses/dgraph-1.1.1, and ethics page: https://jepsen.io/ethics
This level of depth is probably overkill for you, but maybe it will be helpful inspiration.
Hey, thanks for making this! Is this manually curated or are you crowdsourcing at all? With how quickly this space is evolving, I think some kind of pull request system for adding new apps is probably the easiest way to make this site useful to people. Some other suggestions:
Many note-taking apps lack proper math support, which is a big dealbreaker for those who need it. Please consider emphasizing math support as one of the major features on the front page! Here’s what proper math support looks like..
At the moment I believe only Typora and Noteworthy support this style of editing, but feel free to correct me
Jupyter-style Markdown blocks are also great.
OneNote is probably the most frustrating math editin experience.
Math support can be further broken down into the following features:
Enter math as LaTeX source
Calculator-style (for lack of a better term) math input like MathLive or OneNote
Support for inline math blocks via $...$
Support for display math blocks via $$...$$
Custom delimiters?
Support for custom math commands via \providecommand, \newcommand, etc
Consider also adding “open source” as one of the major search options (perhaps it’s there already? but I looked and didn’t see it)
Higher information density! There’s too much padding everywhere! For example, this page should show you a feature comparison table without having to manually click on each app. Basically, the checkboxes on the side should “slice” the table to show you only the columns/rows that are most relevant to your needs.
Hey! Cool site - I think this is very helpful. The competitive landscape in this space is bewildering. This looks like a thoughtfully designed and fair comparison site. (Coming from a Notion dev)
My bit of feedback would be to disclose how this site is affiliated with AmpleNote in a more direct way. While I think the association might detract from the appearance of fairness initially, I think it’d be better to stick an ethics disclosure in the footer than leave users to stumble into it in the FAQ or by following links to your company homepage.
Also, I noticed that the mailto link to the “corrections@…” in the FAQ is broken - it links to
https://mailto:corrections@noteapps.info/Thank you, I’ve updated the link! Putting a disclosure in the footer seems like a good idea, don’t suppose you have seen any prior art for language that is used to concisely convey such info in a similar situation? I will mull possible language myself and try to figure something out.
The first thing that comes to mind for me is Jepsen, a database correctness consultancy that publishes both independent and funded analyses. Jepsen leads each analysis with with a short introduction and a link to the ethics page. Example funded analysis: https://jepsen.io/analyses/dgraph-1.1.1, and ethics page: https://jepsen.io/ethics
This level of depth is probably overkill for you, but maybe it will be helpful inspiration.
Hey, thanks for making this! Is this manually curated or are you crowdsourcing at all? With how quickly this space is evolving, I think some kind of pull request system for adding new apps is probably the easiest way to make this site useful to people. Some other suggestions:
Many note-taking apps lack proper math support, which is a big dealbreaker for those who need it. Please consider emphasizing math support as one of the major features on the front page! Here’s what proper math support looks like..
$...$$$...$$\providecommand,\newcommand, etcConsider also adding “open source” as one of the major search options (perhaps it’s there already? but I looked and didn’t see it)
Higher information density! There’s too much padding everywhere! For example, this page should show you a feature comparison table without having to manually click on each app. Basically, the checkboxes on the side should “slice” the table to show you only the columns/rows that are most relevant to your needs.
See also the exhaustive feature comparison list made by the folks at Athens Research
Some apps that I’d like to see included on the list in the future: