Thanks for the feedback!
I was indeed trying to explain something technical (i.e. a tunneling service) in a non-technical way in an attempt to be friendly towards designers, but it seems like I still have some work to do on the product page.
I was indeed trying to explain something technical (i.e. a tunneling service) in a non-technical way in an attempt to be friendly towards designers, but it seems like I still have some work to do on the product page.
That said, it might actually be easier for me to use the "accordion" approach, as you suggested, My video editing skills are pretty limited and this is currently a side project of mine that's completely bootstrapped.
The way you wrote your product page and app description is fascinating not because it was so oblique as to be completely meaningless, but because you appear to have been so thoroughly unaware of that fact.
This is an extremely common problem with technical documentation. We find pages and pages of description of frameworks and libraries created without simply answering the fundamental question, “What does this do?” And those pages could be easily replaced with one brief annotated example.
Technical people are often unaware that they have created a desert of meaning and substance.
Err, yes there is, if they are willing to pay you money to simplify something they don't understand.
I agree that if you're not technical you're a dinosaur, but it turns out a good number of dinosaurs are still out there and they have money to spend. So why not cater to them while they're around?
Your product page made sense to me and might also make sense if your customers are web and mobile web developers