Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Pen.io

pen.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 102 posts

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#81

Post by feint »

kuldeep_kap wrote: post #75

I think you should give them out editable pretty URLs made from title of the post such as pen.io/this-is-a-test-page instead of sub-domains. This will also help you with the SEO. Assume that people will want to build lot of pages. Don't let the lack of sub-domains hinder this. Plus, in future you can let them build a blog or something from this set of pages. Advantage you have is you are letting them start-off with m…

you can have: this-is-a-test.pen.io plus with the current model I have you can also have: this-is-a-test.pen.io/page/1 etc. So actually people can create more pages.

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#84

Post by hardik988 »

aquadoctorbob wrote: post #28

Reminds me of TidyPub, also featured on HN a few months back: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1952882

Wow, I didn't know there were so many of these around. I just built a simple one for myself to publish clean notes, and some stuff I wouldn't post on my blog.

If anyone wants to check it out: http://notes.hardikr.com/

edit: updated URL

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#86

Post by JoachimSchipper »

feint wrote: post #50
ElbertF wrote: post #25

Be careful with JavaScript and saving plain text passwords in cookies: http://cookie.pen.io I just stole your password. :)

sorry my mistake and thanks for picking it up. Passwords are now hashed and working on the js now

See http://searchyc.com/bcrypt. Really, you can't do crypto in Javascript - see e.g. http://rdist.root.org/2010/11/29/final-post-on-javascript-cr....

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#87

Post by hnhg »

trampsymphony wrote: post #67
nhangen wrote: post #41

I love the idea, but I hate the domain. Still, going to use this to replace the PDF's I've been penning.

FWIW, when I see pen.io I get a penis/penile sort of vibe. Beautifully executed service, though.

It's definitely something that at least in the north of England would be hurled around as a playground insult.

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#88

Post by jasonkester »

collypops wrote: post #64
dhimes wrote: post #4

Very cool idea, and nice site. I noticed that you are serving your own jquery. I've read that it's better to link to Google's host as it is more likely to be cached (and other reasons). Is this a conscious decision on your part, or is it just a part of the puzzle you haven't wrestled with yet? (Honest question- I don't know the right answer because I haven't wrestled with it yet.) Google jquery link:

You shouldn't have to depend on CDNs as there's no guarantee they'll be up all of the time. I usualayy have a local fallback that can be triggered in this way: !window.jQuery && document.write(unescape('%3Cscript src="/js/jquery-1.4.2.min.js"%3E%3C/script%3E')) The second script looks for the jQuery global object that should exist after the CDN fetch. If it doesn't exist, it knows to get your own copy. (If you're won…

Have you tested that to make sure that it blocks on the first script tag in every browser?

Over the internet (as opposed to on your dev box), I'd expect that to always evaluate to false and therefore include your local script.

You might want to look into putting that call into window.onload so that it does what you think it does.

Re: Show HN: Pen.io

#90

Post by zepolen »

dhimes wrote: post #4

Very cool idea, and nice site. I noticed that you are serving your own jquery. I've read that it's better to link to Google's host as it is more likely to be cached (and other reasons). Is this a conscious decision on your part, or is it just a part of the puzzle you haven't wrestled with yet? (Honest question- I don't know the right answer because I haven't wrestled with it yet.) Google jquery link:

I consciously prefer serving it myself rather than google because if it's a first time visitor, he will be requesting other static files as well from the site, so having a cached copy of jquery leads to minimal loading time differences (although it does save on bandwidth).

However if there isn't a cached copy of google's jquery there is the overhead of a dns query and new http connection to google.

This compared to the already open keepalive from my static server increases load time dramatically.

First impressions count, and you have few vital seconds to make a good one.

Post reply on HN