I think you misunderstood me. I was definitely not saying that Fibery is superior to all other tools for search. Quite the reverse.
My point was that if you pick a product area, say search, Fibery is not as good as the best implementation out there, that is true.
And the same will be true for notifications, the same will be true for whiteboards, and for reports/analytics, and for Gantt charts, and for…
But it is not the same tool that is at the top of each of these lists.
If you want the best whiteboard experience, maybe you pick Miro, but you don’t get the best Gantt chart experience in Miro(!)
If you want the best notifications experience, pick X, but X will not be as good as Y for search.
and so on…
Each potential user will place different weighting on the various features/product areas, and it is true that for some people, a particular area is so vitally important that a sub-optimal experience is a deal-breaker (which was clearly almost the case for @HereBeBeasties )
But for every user that complains that product area X is just not good enough, there are other users for whom X is just about good enough. It’s like the pareto principle in multiple dimensions.
No, that’s a quote from the Fibery website
Totally agree, and I have no doubt that improvements will come, but as a counter example, there are many votes for Fibery to get a native implementation of form view and at the moment Fibery has nothing to offer.
When thinking of the 80/20 principle, putting development resources into form view may generate a better return (in terms of number of potential users) than incremental improvements to notifications/search/timeline…
TLDR any user can pick a particular product area and say “Why can’t Fibery do it as well as Acme Co?” but it would be impossible for Fibery to devote enough resources to become the best-in-class in that area without forfeiting opportunities for improvement in other areas.