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

Shopify acquires Tailwind

tailwindcss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 431 posts

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#421

Post by petcat »

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #278
petcat wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer the terseness of jQuery's API and things like chaining dom operations with the fluent API. I don't like the native DOM API. Too verbose (I still read and review code)

I still think the only reason to use jQuery is if you need IE11 support. Otherwise, it's really simple to do all the things you mentioned without the complexity/heaviness of jQuery. Something like this: ``` const $ = s => { const r = {}; const els = [...document.querySelectorAll(s)]; r.text = t => (els.forEach(e => e.textContent = t), r); r.on = (ev, fn) => (els.forEach(e => e.addEventListener(ev, fn)), r); // ... re…

Right, I can cobble together my own worse version of jQuery if I wanted to.

Or I can just use jQuery.

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#423

Post by tao_oat »

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #278
petcat wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer the terseness of jQuery's API and things like chaining dom operations with the fluent API. I don't like the native DOM API. Too verbose (I still read and review code)

I still think the only reason to use jQuery is if you need IE11 support. Otherwise, it's really simple to do all the things you mentioned without the complexity/heaviness of jQuery. Something like this: ``` const $ = s => { const r = {}; const els = [...document.querySelectorAll(s)]; r.text = t => (els.forEach(e => e.textContent = t), r); r.on = (ev, fn) => (els.forEach(e => e.addEventListener(ev, fn)), r); // ... re…

Does anyone actually need IE11 support in 2026? It was released 13 years ago.

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#424

Post by Xelbair »

fg137 wrote: post #42

Serious question: is there a need to reach for tailwind if you are building a new site? Won't using vanilla CSS while taking advantage of the latest features be pretty good, since humans are not manually making edits (which removes many of the pain points of maintaining CSS), while simplifying dependency and the build pipeline?

Real answer was always no.

Tailwind is just conceptually bunch of css inline styles repackaged as classes for performance boost. It was always just shifting complexity around, but offered an immediate perception of productivity gain, because you could just make a quick edit here and there.

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#425

Post by flossly »

Glad they have a patron now. I use it in my project (because scoped-css is not yet available in browsers and I do not want to deal much with CSS). LLMs write Tailwind easily, so that's good. And I do not have yet another place where cruft builds up (the CSS files) while they changes to them can silently mess up some UI I did not check.

So thanks Shopify for taking them under your wings.

X-mas wish: that the Servo project gets a proper patron (looking at you, Huawei and Samsung).

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#426

Post by lemonberry »

potato-peeler wrote: post #413

Never preferred tailwind. Much simpler to write plain css. It’s easier to create reusable components than what ppl think. CSS hardly has a steep learning curve. Problem with tailwind and many newer css frameworks I see posted even on HN, is they don’t seem to work on older devices, which is a shame. I guess ppl simply test on their latest phones and call it a day. Older ios itself have roughly 7% market share [1], th…

Why wouldn't Tailwind work on older devices? It's just a bunch of classes. If you're using a feature the browser doesn't support it's not going to work whether it's vanilla css or tailwindcss.

That said, I prefer vanilla CSS. Modern CSS is great.

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#428

Post by fsuts »

But why?

What’s the commercial argument for shopify buying a css library. What’s the synergy and business benefits.

Is it just the hire of the tailwind devs with some fanfare?

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#429

Post by ryanbrunner »

_heimdall wrote: post #384
ryanbrunner wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, if you're going to aggressively componentize whatever you're building (i.e. a button isn't a css class on a simple `a` tag but a distinct component that exists in it's own file somewhere) there's huge advantages to having your styling be associated directly with your components, and Tailwind is a great option (among many) for that. If you're building something where your unit of organization looks m…

Why are your buttons `a` tags?!? Buttons should be `button` tags. Links should be `a` tags.

It's common to want things that look like buttons that functionally link to a page.

This isn't really straightforward with the HTML `button` tag so `a` tags that appear like buttons are common. I'm not really proposing something out of the ordinary here, nearly every high level component library that has a built in "button" will support applying them to `a` tags and most likely have that as their primary example of a button.

Re: Shopify acquires Tailwind

#430

Post by mrweasel »

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #278
petcat wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer the terseness of jQuery's API and things like chaining dom operations with the fluent API. I don't like the native DOM API. Too verbose (I still read and review code)

I still think the only reason to use jQuery is if you need IE11 support. Otherwise, it's really simple to do all the things you mentioned without the complexity/heaviness of jQuery. Something like this: ``` const $ = s => { const r = {}; const els = [...document.querySelectorAll(s)]; r.text = t => (els.forEach(e => e.textContent = t), r); r.on = (ev, fn) => (els.forEach(e => e.addEventListener(ev, fn)), r); // ... re…

jQuery is 30kB, there's not a lot of heaviness. In a world of React, Vue, htmx and what have you, 30kB is nothing.

If you like the syntax and functionality of jQuery, or if you're just use to it now, there's very little reason to no use it, and speed and size certainly isn't a reason. 15 years ago, maybe, but not in 2026.

Post reply on HN