
A web-based Excel/database hybrid - longneckdeer
http://www.ragic.com
======
mattmanser
This isn't what you think it is. It's definitely not an excel competitor. It
feels like a cross between an Access and a Salesforce competitor.

It looks like you're close to making a good product. But you're at 90%.

Basically I tried creating a little app and it's very painful. I don't believe
you've sat with a user and watched them try to create an app without you
intervening and giving guidance.

So sit down with some real users and watch them try to use it. Your front page
claims install>customize>import. It doesn't work like that at all. It was
confusing. For example the upload excel img looks like it's a button. It's
not. When I did manage to create an app I first tried editing the cells
directly, but they're not cells like excel. Eventually I realized I had to add
a textbox, which was also confusing as the width kept changing and I couldn't
stop it. At about this point I gave up. Then got hit with multiple alerts when
I tried to close the pages.

Then tried to save it.

The most confusing save mechanism I've ever come across.

Tried to just close the page again. Multiple warnings again.

Argh.

And calm. I'm in the process of stopping smoking so my temper is a little,
hmm, Hulkish.

I decided to try again while writing this using the import excel function. It
didn't work from the front page at all as you had to already have a project
(why?). When I tried to do it via the upload the open file dialog never
opened. I gave up again.

Also find someone who knows something about sales and marketing. There's not
even a CTA button on the homepage to signup. The copy is terrible. You've made
the mistake of going typical corporate million page website which doesn't
actually tell me anything at all. The order of the home page is all wrong (you
should not be leading with the app concept which doesn't actually seem to be
in the product). You're making the mistake of selling features, not benefits.

I'd personally spend a little more time so the sales website didn't look like
bootstrap (the irony being you don't even seem to be using bootstrap).

As I said, good, but no cigar _yet_.

~~~
longneckdeer
Thanks, very useful comment, and I apologize for the confusion that you
experienced.

Right now most of the Ragic developers first go through 2 hours of training
before they start building. So they kind of know what the basics process are.

We are in the transition process trying to move from a tool that we personally
teach developers how to use, to a self help type of product that developers
can start by themselves. Functions like drag and drop add fields are added
just this month.

I will certainly find a group of users, sit by them one by one to make our
learning process a lot smoother. Again, sorry for the confusion. I think I
will certainly post again after we tune the process. The HN posting feedback
is really helpful.

~~~
mattmanser
I'm curious how many of you there are? As you should try getting funding if
there's only a couple of you and you're attempting to bootstrap, get a good UX
guy and really try to hit the ball out the park.

There's definitely a market for something like this and personally I think
Salesforce is a overcharging by a lot and the field is ripe.

Ignore the thing about the guy moaning about $19.95 p/m.

------
specialist
Idea #22 is a web version (realization) of Lotus Improv. He's old enough that
he should know better.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Improv>

I've been waiting ages for this. Desktop, web-based, tablets, however.

Old timers may recall that Lotus Symphony had both database and spreadsheet
features, like a multi-app. It was cool. At the time, Lotus Improv seemed like
a healthy fusion, next logical step, minimum viable product.

Improv was victim of the Innovators Dilemma plus installed base inertia. I
remain impressed that even with their market dominance, Lotus was
experimenting, releasing crazy new products, and willing to eat their own
children. (Though I can't forgive Lotus Notes, sorry.)

PG's original blurb (<http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html>):

"22. A web-based Excel/database hybrid. People often use Excel as a
lightweight database. I suspect there's an opportunity to create the program
such users wish existed, and that there are new things you could do if it were
web-based. Like make it easier to get data into it, through forms or scraping.

Don't make it feel like a database. That frightens people. The question to ask
is: how much can I let people do without defining structure? You want the
database equivalent of a language that makes its easy to keep data in linked
lists. (Which means you probably want to write it in one.)"

~~~
roryokane
I’m interested in what you say about Lotus Improv, but I’m having trouble
understanding what it has to do with Ragic Builder.

    
    
      He's old enough that he should know better.
    

Who is old enough, the Ragic Builder creator or PG? That person should know
better than to what?

~~~
specialist
Ragic claims to be a fulfillment of Idea #22. I haven't tried it, so can't
comment. I'm just observing that Improv predates Idea #22 by about 1.5
decades.

------
sardonicbryan
Just some hopefully constructive feedback here: for Excel power users, you're
not just competing with Excel, you're competing with Excel+ODBC+SQL+Workbench
which is basically an Excel/DB hybrid, just not web based.

I read your "how this is different than a spreadsheet" blog, and none of the
examples struck me as compelling, even though I use my Excel/SQL toolchain
every day. Given how strong the ecosystems are around those tools, I think it
would be very challenging to convert power users without some really obvious
hook.

That one hook COULD be a good mobile client. For example, I have a dashboard
built in Excel with an ODBC connection to a few of my company's DBs. However,
I obviously can't see this on my phone, since no mobile Excel client supports
ODBC (not to mention the macros I have built in).

I could maybe see a "disruption" angle, where you provide 75% of the
functionality of Excel+ODBC+SQL+Workbench in one easier to use package, but I
wonder how large the market is for people who want to work with that level of
data but don't want power tools. I guess that's one area where you'd have to
trust your market research/gut.

~~~
debacle
He could readily target the market of people who use Excel for things they
shouldn't be doing, because they don't know how to encorporate SQL+Workbench,
and don't have the time to learn.

~~~
sardonicbryan
Yea, it seems like this is a pretty market position if you ask me -- if you
need DB like tools, why not just use a DB? This product would have to be an
order of magnitude easier to set up and use to get people to use that instead,
IMO.

Could be wrong though -- would be great if something like this could improve
the data/analytical literacy of the general population.

~~~
mgkimsal
"if you need DB like tools, why not just use a DB"

A) people don't really know they need db-like tools. B) even if they did,
setting up a database to have even a portion of the "up and running" aspect of
Excel is extremely time consuming.

The closest I've seen is some companies that get advanced enough set up a
database engine somewhere, then set up Excel to connect to it as a datasource
(ODBC or whatever). This still requires them to understand how to set up a
database, secure it, and model table structures around their data, which is
asking quite a lot from someone who really just wants to create a few short
forms to collect data.

------
tatsuke95
There are two markets:

1\. The programmers, utilizing an Excel+SQL setup for users in an IT setting.

2\. The business users who use Excel for more than they should be, or use it
in a place a DB would be far more efficient.

Like another poster said, the former probably aren't going to find anything
above and beyond what they can't already accomplish with a DB and Excel.

The latter, on the other hand, are a _huge_ market and need help. This is the
market who hammer spreadsheets, but are completely in the dark when it comes
to databases, and to whom, I believe, PG was referring. As one of those users
(okay, I know a bit more about DBs than the "average" business person), this
looks complicated. I can't determine precisely what it does, and there seems
to be a lot of programmer speak. Apps? APIs? "Development" required? It looks
hard. In other words, I _want_ an Excel/DB setup, in theory, but don't really
know if this is what I think it is.

That said, as a data dabbler, this is intriguing. I'll be following progress.

~~~
gruseom
Why do you want "an Excel/DB setup"? In what ways is Excel not enough?

You mention that a DB would be far more efficient. What kind of efficiency do
you have in mind?

~~~
tatsuke95
Querying and manipulating millions of rows. Basic usage of Excel doesn't work
well there, in my experience.

The technique I've used in the past is to use SQL to query and output the data
I need, then manipulate it in Excel. I'll leave it open that I'm not good
enough with Excel, but I find MySQL query language more powerful for
filtering, grouping, etc. However, there are a few too many steps in there,
and it's not something I'll be teaching my mother. Someone actually has to set
up the database, and that's no cake walk for the lay person.

Now, I'm going to take a guess that you're implying that Excel already has
these features, to which I'll answer: possibly, but nobody I know is using
them. That's why I think it's a large market.

But hey, if you know a solution off the top of your head, let me know. I'm
always looking!

~~~
gruseom
No, I don't think Excel already has those features. It's an open question how
to do it in a way that the average spreadsheet user will find intuitive.
Sounds like you have some opinions about that, as do I. But it looks like
these guys have a useful product and I don't want to hijack their thread. If
you want to discuss it offline my email is in my profile.

------
redtexture
Essentially, your pricing indicates that you offer only the crippled version
of the application unless the individual or small group obtains the $199.99
per month account.

The pricing and usage limitations on forms for "personal" (one user / 10 forms
/ $19.95/month) and "lite" (20 users, 10 Forms, $99.99/month) indicate that
you don't understand that full collaboration for both large and small entities
is where you will find and grow your market of users, and that small groups
are not going to be thrilled with crippled functionality.

I suggest charging only on a per-user basis and not cripple the application
with limited forms. Make it easy for even small users to want to rely on the
full application for all of their activity. They will tell everybody about
your useful application, and won't advertise its silly crippled limitation.
Let both small organizations and individuals grow into comprehensive and full
usage without a big hurdle ($200 a month) for complete functionality.

~~~
wilgertict
What redtexture says: all my clients would need the $199/month package because
they are collaborating with multiple people (otherwis they could be using
Excel with a lot less trouble). But for $2400 a year it's not that much of a
cost saving anymore. Please offer "more reasonable" pricing plans.

~~~
gruseom
_they are collaborating with multiple people (otherwise they could be using
Excel with a lot less trouble)._

What's insufficient about Google Docs for that? i.e. a spreadsheet that
supports collaborative use.

------
ses
This is very pendantic I know but in your demo video the line 'They all have
tons of features that Emily don't need, all she needed the most is a CRM with
attendance records' would be more correct English if it read: 'They all have
tons of features that Emily doesn't need, all she needs is a CRM with
attendance records'.

In any case, the concept sounds good and is otherwise well presented.

~~~
longneckdeer
Hey thanks! I really appreciate this, my English is not all that good.

~~~
redwood
Front page grammatical issues: "Most of the apps in our library is free"
should be "...are free"

Anyway I haven't tried your products, but I'm very positive about what you're
trying to do. The HN community is so comfortable with programming that they'll
connect less with the value of this concept than many, so take their comments
with a grain of salt. For the countless people out there who feel constrained
by their knowledge of spreadsheets --- useful but limited in scale --- this
could be very useful, _if done right_

------
Ironchefpython
I poked around for a bit.

I want to reiterate what has already been said; this does not feel like Excel.
If you spend some time watching (medium-to-low skill) people who use Excel as
a general purpose tool to perform general tracking and calculation tasks,
you'll see there's a very different way they work.

They start with a blank sheet, and start putting data in rows. Then they add
some formulas to the rows, and do a bunch of sums on some columns. The idiom
you've chosen, of dragging and dropping, is a significant workflow change.

A few more things that I haven't seen pointed out already.

Your pricing scheme should differentiate between designer and non-designer
users. If I buy a personal account, it's kinda useless when I can't give my
url to someone and tell them to create a new entry and edit data.

Also regarding users, the lack of OpenID integration seems an obvious lack.
Creating an account just to enter some data is a pretty high bar. Ideally, I
should be able to share a form via email, implicitly granting data entry
permissions to the recipient, then they can click the link in the email and be
prompted to use their email provider's OpenID to authenticate.

Anyway, you've got some good ideas here, but I don't think you've got the
right focus on Excel/Access users quite yet. It lacks the _feel_ of Excel, and
lacks the features of Access.

~~~
longneckdeer
The idea is like this:

If the user already have data on an Excel, we provide an import wizard so that
they can import their Excel and create a database with it.

If the user does not have existing data from Excel, they can first define the
data fields on Ragic using the design mode. They can actually create cells as
fields just like they would on a spreadsheet, but a lot of users find it hard
to catch on so we added the drag and drop model just recently. So both ways
should work okay.

And actually we do support OpenID log in, and the ability to click on an URL
in e-mail to grant access to some DB entries. I guess we have to work on
making these features more obvious to users.

Thanks for the feedback!

------
viraptor
Nice. I accept everything that decreases the chances I'll have to work with
<http://quickbase.intuit.com/> again in the future.

~~~
longneckdeer
Kind of curious what kind of trouble that you ran into when using Quickbase.
You can e-mail me if you don't feel like posting it here. (jeff@ragic.com)

~~~
viraptor
I'm not good at describing the UX parts, but every time I deal with it seems
painful. I can't easily get to what I need, update notifications don't work
the way I expect (you need to manually mark stuff as viewed), creating custom
tables can be blocked by project owners (I understand not editing the shared
ones, but if I want to create my own report, I don't see a reason to disable
that). I can't point out many big issues, it's just papercuts whichever
direction I turn to.

Things that I can point out as missing:

\- no support for other locales (it's dd/mm/yyyy and 2300, not 11pm where I
live, US is not the only place in the world)

\- no rich-text on long-content fields

\- no actual changes visible in revisions, history contains only "changed by
xxx on yyy"

From the developer's perspective, the API is really silly. It seems to be
completely different from normal access path. Tokens need to be authorized by
project owners, not all authentication schemes work with APIs. I don't get at
all why is API access treated as something additional, rather than a normal
usage pattern. If I've got a user account, I should be able to do via the API
every action I'm allowed to do via web - without anyone's blessing.

API design also leaves a lot room for improvements. Custom XML only with
things like this definition of a query:

    
    
        <query>{'5'.CT.'Ragnar Lodbrok'}</query>
        <options>num-4.sortorder-A.skp-10.onlynew</options>
    

Keep in mind that '-s only separate the arguments to the operators, not the
actual items, so for multiple values you have to quote with " inside of a '.
Now try to protect that against injections. As a developer I want to cry at
that point. Also the HAS operator is special cased to work only on lists of
users via their screen name, id, or email... Did I mention that separators for
lists of elements are periods (unless explicitly defined as semi-colons in
some places).

Trying to figure out the exact meaning of "field_type", "base_type", "role"
and "mode" in the results (all are attributes on every value of the results)
along with how to resolve them when they reference values in other tables
(which can be done in 3 different slightly underdocumented ways from what I've
seen so far) is pretty difficult. This may be a good start for a TDWTF
article...

~~~
shill
I like QuickBase for prototyping and departmental applications but it does
have it's idiosyncrasies. Unfortunately, I don't get to use it much anymore
because I am bootstrapping a startup and it is too expensive (not free enough)
for us. If we start scaling I will use QuickBase to automate as much as
possible.

I have a working DBAPI compliant Python module that is about 40% complete. It
really needs a method to translate SQL to QuickBase's clunky xml query format.
The Ruby API has one and it would be trivial to port it to Python.

Would you (or anyone else?) be interested in contributing if I put it up on
GitHub?

~~~
viraptor
Not sure how much I can contribute, but I'd definitely appreciate it if you
ever do publish it.

~~~
shill
Cool. I'll email you when it's ready public consumption.

------
louhong
Small suggestion: Add a stronger CTA (I was thinking after the 3 steps and
before the 'next steps'). At that point I was ready to sign-up to try it out
but wasn't sure what to do next.

FWIW I think this is an interesting approach. We're trying to approach one
specific use case in our own product (I'm in agreement that smaller companies
need an alternate solution to larger CRM tools). Good luck!

------
changtimwu
Nice idea. I haven't tried it yet. When I see the word "Excel/database", I
image it's a system that can import existed excel files and generates an
runnable CRUD app instantly. Does Ragic archive this?

~~~
longneckdeer
Yes, using the import Excel wizard we can do that.

------
kaolinite
Just a tip: when I clicked on the video, I assumed it had loaded a new page
and then clicked back in my browser (ending up back on HN). Maybe make the
overlay fade in or be partially transparent?

~~~
longneckdeer
Great tip! Thanks! We'll do that.

------
mooli7dm
Great idea.

The logo is not showing up for me, or for that matter, neither are any of the
images on your Features or Pricing pages.

On your home page, what is your primary call to action? Do you want people to
watch the video? Could you have people try something out? How about making the
applications clickable to show more details or have people play with the
applications? Have your video proofread for grammar. Good luck!

~~~
longneckdeer
We used Google Application Engine as our CDN...turning on billing now!

------
streptomycin
"Most of the apps in our library is free" should be "Most of the apps in our
library are free".

------
andybak
Anyone else stop reading after seeing the lowest tier was $19.95/month?

Maybe I'm just a cheapskate...

~~~
bergerj
I didn't stop reading, but it feels like too high (for lowest tier).

I think there should at least be a FREE tier which allows 1 or 2 forms. Once
someone sees the value, they'll jump for more.

I understand that textual data is light, but 250MB seems quite low given
current costs of hard drive storage.

Why the user limit too? Your costs seem to be in data transfer/storage.

~~~
longneckdeer
The user limit is to segment large user sites from small user sites. We assume
larger users sites have more budget.

But we seem to need a cheaper plan designed for developers and geeks so that
they can play around Ragic with minimal investment.

~~~
Zak
It seems to me you might want a free plan suited to app development but not
production use (e.g. something that doesn't keep data long-term) to encourage
more people to develop for your platform.

------
longneckdeer
Disclosure: I'm one of the founders of Ragic.

~~~
citricsquid
How is the name pronounced? "Rage-ick" or "Rag-ick"?

~~~
longneckdeer
Rag-ick It's suppose to be Rapid + Magic

~~~
danso
If it's not too late, I think you should consider a name revamp. I get that
you want to convey the speed and power/ease/fluidity of your application, but
the truncation + concatenation of those two words ends up not bringing either
of those words to mind. I don't blame you if English is not your first
language; but this is a case where the combo does not work because you've
combined two unrecognizable parts of two words to create a third
unrecognizable word.

As someone said earlier, people are much more likely to think of "tragic."
Actually, I think they'll think of "rage", which is an emotion that you most
definitely do not want associated with your software.

Given that you aren't even getting the connotation of "rapid"/"magic", you're
better off using an arbitrary word.

For Arrested Development fans, think of the combo-profession of "Analyst" +
"Therapist".

------
longneckdeer
Some of the content didn't show for a while because we used GAE as our CDN and
we exceeded billing limit.

Things should work normally now.

------
eddyweb
Nice set of ideas at <http://ycombinator.com/ideas.html>

------
EastCoastLA
Please don't end up like DabbleDB.

~~~
smiler
This is the biggest concern - invest a ton of effort into something and then
the company gets bought out and the product dies. The least Dabble could have
done was release DabbleDB as open source.

~~~
EastCoastLA

      It would be nice for them to have written in the contract to open source their product if they go out of business and are not purchased are liquidated by another company.  
      I too spent a lot of time utilizing DabbleDB unique tool-set and have yet to get back to the level of productivity after they went under.

------
jurre
You forgot to add the rounded corners to the about page content area.

