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

Google Web Designer

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 462 posts

Re: Google Web Designer

#231

Post by diminoten »

arthulia wrote: post #211
diminoten wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could stop using a website you don't think does ads correctly.

I don't think that's completely fair. The people who are providing the content on a lot of web pages are not the same people who are responsible for the monetization scheme. Some sites have good/decent content, but really obtrusive advertisements that the authors aren't responsible for.

So what? 99 times out of 100, the people monetizing the site are also the ones who pay the bills.

You aren't entitled to content just because it's good.

Re: Google Web Designer

#232

Post by gwdengineer »

simonsarris wrote: post #22

The most important feature of this (to Google(?)) is the built-in ad editor. It's the last point on the feature list page, but it's very telling that it's the first thing on the "Create New" screen. https://support.google.com/webdesigner/answer/3261498?hl=en&...

While Ads is an important focus area for Web Designer, we don't see it as an 'Ads only' tool.

Our ambition while building Google Web Designer is that it be a general-purpose, awesome HTML5 content builder.

Hence the name Web Designer & not Ad Designer.

We aim to learn from our users, iterate & push quickly to reach our ultimate goal of being a kick- general purpose HTML5 builder!

Re: Google Web Designer

#233

Post by mike-cardwell »

diminoten wrote: post #194
abalone wrote: post #118

Ok, the war is on. Does anyone know of a good HTML5 ad blocker? Flash was awesome . It made it really easy to block animated ads. My browsing experience had been wonderful ever since I installed a Flash blocker a few years ago. Also did wonders for my battery life. Please, please help my browsing experience remain wonderful. Thanks.

Or you could stop using a website you don't think does ads correctly.

You don't know if a site contains ads until you visit it, and by then, they've already passed off your information to their Ad network partners and exposed you to the risk of Ad network malware.

The safe thing to do is to block Ads by default. And only disable them when they've shown that they're not just letting mass third party Ad networks embed arbitrary script in their page whilst harvesting your private information.

Re: Google Web Designer

#234

Post by gwdengineer »

JacksonGariety wrote: post #173
gwdengineer wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, We are glad you are trying out GWD. You are correct that it seems like a bit of overhead just to render a simple rectangle. However, as alphakappa astutely observed, there is some overhead to parse the JSON data which describes the various shapes and to render those shapes in canvas(es). What you see is the entire canvas rendering library used by GWD. That code will be reused for additional shapes you create, inc…

I'm curious, why not... #rectangle { width: 200px; height: 150px; background #FF0000; } ...by default?

Hi,

Great observation! We have had this discussion internally as well.

For now, we wanted to have a clear separation in the types of content the user is creating on a canvas, since canvas enables different types of content. And, in some cases, there isn't a 1-1 fallback between a canvas shape definition and an HTML element, e.g., an oval with inner radius.

However, we realize that in a lot of cases users just want elements that look like rectangles, and a DIV with certain styles will suffice. We will work to direct users towards that workflow in such cases.

Thanks, Google Web Designer team

Re: Google Web Designer

#235

Post by mike-cardwell »

debacle wrote: post #217
arthulia wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's completely fair. The people who are providing the content on a lot of web pages are not the same people who are responsible for the monetization scheme. Some sites have good/decent content, but really obtrusive advertisements that the authors aren't responsible for.

The people providing the content are still being supported by the monetization scheme - you're taking money from them when you use their content without viewing their ads.

No. Those people are exposing us to mass cross-site tracking before we even get to see their content, without our permission, and without most people even knowing it's happening.

Re: Google Web Designer

#236

Post by yk »

codereflection wrote: post #214
yk wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am quite happy with Ghostery+NoScript. If you have a general solution, then you would just end up with an arms race. See [0] for details. [0] http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/12/its-made...

IMHO - Ghostery should not be used, Disconnect should be used instead ( https://disconnect.me/ ). Why? Because Ghostery is selling data to advertisers. https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=ghoste...

Yes, but IMHO they are still the best trade off. ( But I will have a look at disconnect, thanks for the link.)

Re: Google Web Designer

#237

Post by benologist »

anarchy8 wrote: post #180
tumultco wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the purpose of my startup :); we've been making an HTML5 animation tool for OS X for the last two years: http://tumult.com/hype/

How do you feel about having Google as a direct competitor?

They're the perfect competitor - they validate the market, they almost always fail, and they acquire winners.

Re: Google Web Designer

#238

Post by beernutz »

tumultco wrote: post #188
anarchy8 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you feel about having Google as a direct competitor?

Google itself doesn't scare me; it is really just team vs. team. I think we've got the best product and engineering expertise for this market. Clearly I'm biased :) so I'd encourage anyone to try Tumult Hype and let us know your thoughts (we've got a fully functional 14-day trial on the site). While Google hasn't announced pricing, it is probably safe to say it is going to be free. This is a business for us, so we ch…

I would love to check out your product, but it only runs on OSX. You might consider a port to drastically expand your potential client base.

Google's free offering is cross platform already.

Re: Google Web Designer

#239

Post by lostPixels »

camus wrote: post #198
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adobe has Edge Animate for that and Adobe Flash can export to HTML5 as well. http://html.adobe.com/edge/animate/

Given Adobe track record on betrayal, and borderline extorsion schemes , I would not even touch their tools anymore. They had they chance with Flash,Dreamweaver and Fireworks... Flash = almost dead Dreamweaver = Zombie mod Fireworks = Dead despite its powerfull features like jquerymobile skinning,project files as png files,games graphics, native app design, easily customizable through js. Thank you Elop (who sold MM…

As a former Flash Developer, I will never put my time and money into learning Adobe software again.
Post reply on HN