This is the free version of this report, exactly as a free audit shows it. 13 more findings are in the full report. Read the full report →
Clarity before change.

Independent website review

Big Picture Planner

Website review

A full source-code and hands-on review of what Big Picture Planner (our own product) ships, says and asks visitors to do.

Key judgement

None of this requires a redesign. It requires finishing the pivot, choosing one vocabulary, and cutting controls. The bones are good.

Overall view · Needs attention

https://bigpictureplanner.app/

Inspected 13 July 2026

Full review of the code and the live product (our own product)

What we noticed

A clearer view of what the website is doing now.

A GreatInternet review of what Big Picture Planner says, shows and asks visitors to do:based on full source access and hands-on sessions: it is our own product, reviewed to the standard we sell.

Illustrative sampleWebsite Health Check view

What we looked at

Full source review (55 files, ~11,200 LOC) plus hands-on sessions in the live product as a first-time anonymous user, completed 13 July 2026 and accepted the same day. This pack translates that accepted audit and its implementation programme into our standard report contract; it is dated and presented as an assessment as of 13 July 2026, not a re-audit of the product as it stands today. The repository has moved on since. Sample pack authored under our own methodology, the same one we sell: it is our own product, reviewed to the same standard as a customer's.

The short version

Big Picture Planner has a genuinely strong foundation: the positioning is sharp, the landing page is disciplined and honest, the local-first architecture is the right call for a start-free funnel, and the planner contains more thoughtful engineering than most pre-seed products. The problems are not cosmetic, but they cluster into four fixable root causes: an unfinished repositioning, onboarding that competes with itself, controls that outnumber decisions, and an interaction grammar that changes per surface, sitting on architecture debt that makes every fix riskier than it should be.

None of this requires a redesign. It requires finishing the pivot, choosing one vocabulary, and cutting controls. The bones are good.

The first useful move

Restore the test suite as a deploy gate, then finish the pivot: remove founder-beta identity from the free path and sweep the vocabulary to one canonical set.

Overall signal

A directional view, not a grade.

A genuinely strong foundation (sharp positioning, a disciplined landing page, real engineering craft) carrying meaningful, addressable gaps concentrated at exactly the activation moment: first-run onboarding, delete forgiveness, and interaction consistency.

Overall view: needs attention

What would strengthen it: Finish the pivot (identity, vocabulary), give onboarding one owner, and bring the interaction grammar to one rule per object: all scoped in the implementation programme below as a finishing pass, not a rebuild.

Meaningful gaps create friction or uncertainty and should be addressed deliberately.

Three things that are already working

  • ✓ The landing page is genuinely disciplined: one accent colour, generous spacing, consistent CTA styling, and a 30-second answer to what/who/why/what-next.
  • ✓ The local-first architecture (Dexie with a proper sync queue, retry/backoff, import-decision tracking) is the right call for a "start free, no account" funnel, and it is well engineered, not just present.
  • ✓ The planner contains real engineering craft most pre-seed products skip: overnight blocks, an all-day lane, keyboard nudging, a typed analytics taxonomy with an acquisition-to-activation funnel, and offline sync queueing.

The useful diagnosis

Biggest opportunity and biggest risk

Biggest opportunity

Four onboarding mechanisms compete for the same five seconds, and the tour intermittently eats the first click

A brand-new visitor sees an auto-starting spotlight tour, a "TRY THIS" card in the empty inbox, an empty-week prompt with three calls to action, and a dismissible save banner, all at once, in the first five seconds. Across two live sessions the spotlighted button and quick-add input repeatedly ignored the first trusted click or keystroke and accepted the second.

The pile-up itself (§6.1) was observed directly and is unambiguous; the click-swallowing sub-finding (§6.2) was reproduced repeatedly but the source audit flags it [verify by hand] pending reproduction on real hardware with a different pointing device.

Biggest risk

"FOUNDER BETA" badge and a dormant £40 paid flow still greet every free anonymous user

The product pivoted from a paid founder-beta to free-while-we-build on 29 June 2026, but the old identity leaks everywhere: a hard-coded "FOUNDER BETA" badge greets every anonymous visitor, and a dormant £40 founding-access flow ("Your access needs renewing… £40 one-off founder price") remains reachable in code.

Directly evidenced by file:line citation and by the founder-decisions section explicitly asking whether early users should carry founder status.

Additional legacy finding

The "Life Inbox" rename never finished: four vocabularies for one concept, two for the product's core noun

The panel was renamed app-wide to "Life Inbox", but the tour still says "Send it to Ready", Settings' replay copy says "add a task, send it to Ready", and the search placeholder reads "Search ready items...". Separately, block/task/item/event are used interchangeably for the one thing a user creates ("Add Task" FAB, "Add to Planner", "New Block", "Edit block", "your item").

Every instance is a direct file:line copy citation; this is a grep-verifiable class of finding.

Additional legacy finding

No edge-drag resize on calendar blocks: the single most-expected calendar gesture

Scheduled blocks have no resize handle; duration can only be changed via keyboard +/- or the block editor's duration field, even though every mainstream calendar (Google, Apple, Outlook) has trained this gesture for over a decade.

Directly evidenced: the component has no resize logic and the underlying function already exists, unreachable by drag.

13 more findings in the full audit.

One immediate recommendation

  1. 01

    Restore the test suite so it can gate every later fix, then finish the pivot.

  2. 02

    Give onboarding exactly one owner and rebuild the tour so it never eats a click.

  3. 03

    Bring delete, resize and click behaviour to one predictable rule per object.

More of this report

Go deeper only when it is useful.

Full website audit

Complete findings, evidence, strengths, and what to leave alone

Website Review & Implementation Pack

Website Review & Implementation Pack

The complete Website Review & Implementation Pack: annotated evidence, accepted findings, master plan, numbered work packets, tracker, Decision Register and verification materials.

Website Review & Implementation Pack

Strategic review

A human-led Founder Strategy Review: pre-call hypotheses, consultation, Founder Decision Memo and decision-execution tracker.

Founder Strategy Review

Purchases are temporarily unavailable.

Your current report remains available. Please return later to unlock more sections.

This report continues

What the full report adds

The assessment behind this document is complete. The sections below were produced from the same evidence and are held at a higher access level.

Full website audit

Website Review & Implementation Pack

Complete findings, evidence, strengths, and what to leave alone

Website Review & Implementation Pack

Website Review & Implementation Pack

The complete Website Review & Implementation Pack: annotated evidence, accepted findings, master plan, numbered work packets, tracker, Decision Register and verification materials.

Strategic review

Founder Strategy Review

A human-led Founder Strategy Review: pre-call hypotheses, consultation, Founder Decision Memo and decision-execution tracker.

Open this report at greatinternet.app/r/sample-planner-0000000001 to unlock the sections above.

Methodology & transparency

Methodology, transparency & limitations

This report has been generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence using the evidence available at the time of assessment. GreatInternet applies a defined assessment methodology and presents observations, judgements and recommendations based on that evidence. AI-assisted output should be reviewed by an appropriate human decision-maker before material reliance or implementation.

Limitations

  • This is a full-access source-code and hands-on-session review, not a crawled-page evidence review; evidence citations are file:line references into the planner-v1 repository at audit time rather than captured page evidence.
  • Three findings (onboarding click-swallowing, the slot-click prefill mismatch, and drag ergonomics text-selection) were reproduced via an automated browser session that suffered periodic tool interruptions and are explicitly flagged [verify by hand] in the source audit pending reproduction on real hardware.
  • Not audited: Supabase RLS/policies, the iOS build, admin console security posture beyond noting it is public and OAuth-gated, and email deliverability.
  • The responsive-integrity finding (mobile/tablet layout) is translated from the implementation specification's own description of a separate, later diagnostic pass; the underlying raw report was not itself reviewed for this pack.