[HN Gopher] Show HN: Monito, a browser extension for software te...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Show HN: Monito, a browser extension for software testers
        
       Author : bjarocki
       Score  : 54 points
       Date   : 2021-05-03 10:24 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (getmonito.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (getmonito.com)
        
       | makarov wrote:
       | Looks similar to https://birdeatsbug.com
        
       | nxpnsv wrote:
       | Can i see a report somewhere?
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | Sure,
         | https://www.dropbox.com/s/zffejt4u2l5d3x1/logs-1620070042074...
         | 
         | When you are extracting logs, it creates a single archive with
         | all the items you selected. Usually, it'll be: 1. Combined logs
         | - everything in a single file 2. Network logs 3. Console logs
         | 4. User interactions 5. Navigation events
         | 
         | One user already suggested it'd be nice to include generated
         | HTML with more human-readable logs. I thought about having a
         | web-based log reader, but this seems to be an even better idea.
        
       | topazas wrote:
       | Any open source alternatives?
        
         | brysonreece wrote:
         | Yeah, I would be interested in this as well. I'm not really up
         | for paying $39 for a half finished landing page of info built
         | using reworded Tailwind UI components.
        
           | bjarocki wrote:
           | I agree. The landing page isn't the nicest one. I'm not a
           | designer, though, and I'd rather spend that time improving
           | the product. Is there anything you'd like to see in the
           | extension that'd convince you to pay for it? Happy to
           | improve!
        
             | brysonreece wrote:
             | I totally understand the use of Tailwind UI for an easy way
             | to achieve professional looking components; I use it every
             | single day at my job.
             | 
             | At the same time, you're targeting this product towards
             | customers who are already developer-oriented -- a crowd
             | that is familiar with, or can easily recognize, the same
             | technologies you've used to build Monito. Tweaking the
             | designs to have a more custom flair so it doesn't seem so
             | copy and paste, avoiding the same icons for multiple
             | figures, and especially lowering your price are all things
             | that would probably help with early and continued adoption
             | IMO.
             | 
             | As for things you could include to justify the existing
             | price, I really don't know. There's a heavy difference
             | between paying for a desktop-application license vs a
             | browser extension.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | bjarocki wrote:
               | Valid point. I started noticing Tailwind UI everywhere,
               | and it starts to be a bit annoying indeed. Will def work
               | on it.
               | 
               | We'll see about the price. So far, it sells ok. I'd
               | rather focus on improving the quality and adding useful
               | features.
               | 
               | Regarding the icons, I've just noticed and fixed that,
               | thank you!
        
             | jacekm wrote:
             | > anything you'd like to see in the extension that'd
             | convince you to pay for it?
             | 
             | Different pricing scheme, at least in the beginning. While
             | $39 (or even $59) is acceptable as one time payment, I am
             | not sure if I am willing to pay this for a product that's
             | been on the market for only 3 weeks and whose future is
             | unknown. Charging something like $1-$2 per month will earn
             | you more in the long term and will provide a safer option
             | for the customers (they won't loose too much if you
             | disappear in a couple of months).
             | 
             | BTW, at the organization where I work, we can only make
             | payments to established entities, i.e. someone who has
             | address, account number and can issue an invoice. I guess
             | Gumroad, as a middle party, can provide all of these, still
             | it would add to your credibility if you had an "About" page
             | with the necessary data. Oh and a Privacy Policy would be
             | nice too - some organizations won't allow installing any
             | extensions that are not reviewed by a security team and
             | such reviews often involve checking privacy policies.
        
               | bjarocki wrote:
               | Good point about credibility. I'm going to improve the
               | landing page with a proper about page. I'll also add a
               | privacy policy. From the start, I wanted it to work 100%
               | locally, so I don't have to worry about sensitive data.
               | Now it only uses some ids needed for trials and licenses.
               | 
               | About pricing, I don't think that model would be better.
               | As a solo developer, it's better to charge more and
               | provide better support to fewer customers. I'm not saying
               | no, but it seems to be working well for now. Thank you
               | for the suggestions!
        
             | bendotero wrote:
             | we developers are a stingy lot. I wouldn't base any pricing
             | decision on what technical/developers say. The ultimate
             | customer for this is a support person who is going to give
             | feedback to a developer. To them and/or a QA team, you
             | could be saving them a ton of time with this product.
             | Consider that birdeatsbug starts at free for personal use
             | and then $39/month. You might actually be leaving money on
             | the table if you go $39 one time. Just something to
             | consider.
        
               | bjarocki wrote:
               | At this point the price is 39$ because the product itself
               | isn't polished yet. Now I can see it's actually needed
               | and I'm going to add some nice features. Then it'll go up
               | to ~59$ as it won't be an 'early access' anymore.
        
           | nxpnsv wrote:
           | I'm also not sure exactly what's being sold, but I don't get
           | why tailwind is a problem?
        
       | l-albertovich wrote:
       | Disregard the style complaints, they make no sense. The tool
       | seems super cool and I'd definitely give it a try if there was at
       | least some sort of usage demo as it's not something that would
       | let me do things I can't do already but something that would make
       | it much more comfortable and to evaluate that I need to at least
       | take a look at it.
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | Thank you! Regarding usage demo, do you mean something like
         | video explaining what this tool can do and how is it better
         | than existing solutions?
        
       | suifbwish wrote:
       | As a developer, why would I want to use a special browser than
       | isn't mainstream for anything. It's just going to need retesting
       | in the mainstream ones and I'm not sure what this offers that
       | grease monkey and vanilla developer tools doesn't.
        
       | jacekm wrote:
       | May I suggest adding Jira integration?
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | It'd require storing user login data. For now, I'm not planning
         | this, but we'll see what the future brings.
        
       | dabinat wrote:
       | This seems to be aimed at developers / testers but it might be
       | useful for end-users too.
       | 
       | If a customer reports a problem we can't reproduce, it would be
       | handy to just direct them to a plugin they can download to
       | generate a report.
       | 
       | But the up-front pricing model doesn't work for that kind of
       | scenario because customers wouldn't pay for it. It would be
       | better to have the customer download it for free and enter a one-
       | time code that allows them to use it under my subscription.
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | That's interesting. I'll add that to my to-do and think about
         | possible solutions. Thank you!
        
       | cyberge99 wrote:
       | Is Firefox on the roadmap?
       | 
       | Would the Brave add-on work in Firefox?
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | Now I know people are interested in this so I'll be looking
         | into adding more browsers support. I _think_ Firefox is doable.
         | Safari most probably not (nobody cares probably, but still).
        
       | atonse wrote:
       | This looks awesome. Is the underlying recorded data available in
       | an easy to parse format like JSON?
       | 
       | Would be quite powerful to do 90% of the work of transforming
       | that recording to a puppeteer script to add to one's test suite.
       | 
       | Speaking of which, what is the state of the art right now for
       | browser automation scripts?
        
         | bjarocki wrote:
         | Thank you! And yes, it's all JSON. It's not super easy to read
         | when you get all the data this way, though. I'm planning to add
         | a web-based log reader to parse the logs and display them in
         | the same way it's done in the extension.
         | 
         | Also, generating Cypress/Puppeteer/Playwright tests is on my
         | to-do list. It should be fairly easy because all the data,
         | including selectors, is already there. I wrote more about my
         | plans here: https://jarocki.me/blog/monito
         | 
         | Regarding state of the art for browser automation scripts, I
         | think the most popular tools are Cypress and Puppeteer. I'd
         | like to get some feedback from QA folks, though.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-03 23:02 UTC)