Sorry. Those words weren't really intended to offend.
You sure can dislike the site, I just think you chose the wrong way to express it. Some constructive criticism would be better, as the way you expressed yourself is just offensive towards the author of the work, IMO.
Agreed and that's why I added the part about Mashable and Kathy Sierra as those were the formats that resounded well with me.
Any further constructive criticism I really couldn't share as the list isn't up yet.
I definitely did not appreciate that comment. I understand what you are saying. But my list is sort of a "thank you" to DC members, and you just can't say that. Even though I don't write the details, I put a lot of thought and experience into what appears in that list. I can talk for pages about exactly what I like about each and every one of those programs, I just don't have the time to write it all out. This forum here is very special, and there's a lot of trust between the members. Don't devalue the importance of that trust.
I'm not sure if this was lost in translation but I wasn't criticizing your site content as much as the model. Just making sure that was clear.
I would have quoted the part about Zaine's list since that was what I mainly reference on but I didn't feel it was necessary since someone quoted that section just right before my post.
I bet you like the long reviews, Paul! You write the longest posts ever! Ha!
I'm with you about the long, in-depth reviews. But from a maintenance standpoint, it's impossible to keep up with it. Like my Notetaking roundup, that thing took so long to do, I can barely ever do something like that again with all my other responsibilities.
Well, guilty as charged
I would just like to clarify though that it's not necessarily the length of the reviews that matter to me but the value. I'll clarify below.
The way that you get turned off by a short, not detailed review is the most people would get turned off by an extremely long review.
See, the thing is, believe it or not, I'm not turned off by a short, not detailed review.
The other thing that you have to understand is that the majority of people are not like you. They don't like to read super long posts nor do they write super long posts. So, when they see an extremely long review about a piece of software they are considering, they may not even have th motivation to read the whole thing and just ignore it as soon as they see the length. You write some seriously long posts, brother, and as much as I like reading your posts, I know for a fact that most people would not pay attention to everything you write (I'm not normal either!).
So, you prefer to be really, really complete and extremely detailed when you write something. But that's not necessarily better than taking a step back, and just concentrating what you want to say in a very short, concise way. That is what Zaine is so good at in his list. In a couple of sentences, you get the idea. Now go download the software and play with it.
Don't worry, I understand. In fact, you could say that's why I prefer writing this way.
It's not so much of a desire to see something in-depth over something short but of the fact that Zaine's format has been overused.
Don't get me wrong, I like Zaine's choices. It's the format that's overused. This becomes problematic for users wanting to find something more because all these kinds of lists are designed to as you said "get the idea, go download the software and play with it." and what's worst, often times these becomes the list that gets on top of Google and on the frontpage of social media sites.
The end result being that even if the author didn't have that intention when writing the article, the bottomline is that these lists have become linkbaits whose value is to repeat certain programs that have been mentioned before and add "something" more and it's just a constant race of updating the format again and again with most writer expressing similar concerns as you.
This isn't bad per se because it is true that many don't have the time to maintain a detailed list but the unfortunate side effect is that the sheer amount of these kind of short lists outweigh in depth lists that in the long term, it produces a tidal wave effect where choice heavily favors a certain kind of "tech" searcher and the lesser ones must suffer through forums (most not being as kind as DC to newbies) or settle for a book that is basically a collection of blog articles combined, rephrased and polished and made to look scrumptious.
That is what the "Oh that sucks" meant. It wasn't so much "Oh that sucks, that list is not long enough" or "Oh that sucks, why bother making this list?" as much as "Oh, that's unfortunate. Another list that's not for people like me."
To further clarify this, I'm not saying you should change the format and it might sound contradictory to what I've expressed above but the truth is, I'm truly not bothered by the Zaine's list format one bit and that is the optimum format for most diagonal readers so it's far from a bad thing in my opinion.