Mental Case for iPhone Reviewed on Macworld.com
The iPhone version of Mental Case has been reviewed by Jeff Phillips on Macworld.com. Overall the review is quite positive, though Phillips does seem to show a preference for simpler apps. He doesn't put much value on being able to sync with a Mac, or the powerful lesson scheduling features in Mental Case. But every user has their own goals and use cases, and for some a simpler solution may well be preferable. In any case, we are very grateful for the review.
Simplicity and Power are not mutually exclusive!
I actually don't think Phillips shows much preference for simpler apps. I think he was just flat out wrong in suggesting that Mental Case may be an overkill for someone who merely wants to study for a vocab test because you can simply go to the 'view' mode. Which brings me to another point.
While most would have a preference for simplicity, the power user should be able to access features for 'advanced users' and tailor options accordingly. The idea of using flash cards without some sort of lesson scheduling feature that incorporates the concept of spaced repetition is primitive and inefficient. I have no idea what the new learning algorithm will be like in version 2.x, but I would really hope that there would be a way to manually indicate the level of difficulty of a particular card and maintain the user's autonomy in determining exactly when that card will be due for lesson again (instead of having a fixed interval as it is now). Anki would be an example of this. There is the issue of scaring the bejerkus out of simple users and the assumption that most users of Mental Case are in fact these 'simple' users. However, I think it would be interesting (and probably useful in knowing more about the audience of your consumers) to take a poll to see how many are using the lesson feature, how many think there are too many options, how many think there should be more advanced options, etc..
Additionally, while there is no option of changing format within a card without using HTML (ie, italicizing, bolding, underlining) currently, I don't think this would 'scare off' users at all. An example of this would be Gmail. The ability to use rich-text formatting is there, but I doubt it scares people away from using it. Gmail may be the most powerful email program out there, and yet, it retains enough simplicity for those who want it that many people are increasingly switching to Gmail. I guess what I'm trying to get at is that those who are using HTML are most likely to be power users with many more than a total of 500 cards and would find it impractical to be adding multiple HTML tags for every card.
An analogous product that often juggles with this dilemma of simplicity vs. power/utility is the Mac OS. While it is simple enough for even the most technologically-challenged users, consumers can access more advanced options for increased customization.
The other interesting point that Phillips brings up is the cost of the software. Personally, I think $30 is pocket change for even a poor medical student whose debt is accumulating by the second, given its value to education. However, I wonder if lowering the cost would increase the number of buyers such that the net profit is actually higher for you guys.
Regardless, MC is an awesome product. Thanks for all the hard work and looking forward to the improved learning algorithm!
- medstudent
p.s. (I think it would be cool to perhaps post an update on the blog/news about the projected date of the new version)
Simplicity and Power
Thanks for the feedback, and support in regards to the article.
I agree simplicity and power are not mutually exclusive. In version 2.0 we plan to make a more powerful scheduler, but from the user perspective it may seem simpler. The scheduler now is not that primitive, being based on algorithms similar to supermemo and anki. In version 2.0, we will make the algorithm more robust, work equally well on the iPhone and Mac, and will probably introduce different modes of study for different goals.
Re: HTML. We do not think HTML is the right way to go, and actually regret ever having introduced the option, because it complicates things down the road. The right way to do it is clearly to allow formatting via menus and controls, just like a word processor or other app.
There is always a fine balance with software like this. If we made everyone edit HTML, we could be scaring away potential users, and that hurts everyone because it limits our ability to improve the software.
The pricing is at what we regard as a very fair level now. A student can get it for $19. In the past, we had it priced lower, and raising the price a bit has not hurt sales. In other words, lowering the price would actually not help our bottom line and thereby our ability to make improvements. On the contrary, in fact.
As for version 2.0: we are aiming for mid-year, but giving dates would be futile and only lead to some people taking them too literally and getting angry if we miss them.
Thanks for the feedback.
Drew
---------------------------
Drew McCormack
Mental Case Developer