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

Web Starter Kit

developers.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 218 posts

Re: Web Starter Kit

#171

Post by jebblue »

jacquesm wrote: post #122
malandrew wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. This all leads me to wonder if work can't be done to take the good web concepts and back port them to the operating system level, per the ideas I've briefly touched on in these two prior comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7917921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891913 edit: the two drive-by downvoters are invited to elaborate on how this comment could be improved or what they disagree with…

That almost reads as a re-invention of the java applet.

I've seen many and worked on one in the late 90's that could out do any HTML5 app I've seen or written. We did it with cohesive API's of the caliber of Windows API but multi-platform and web transparent. Those who wrote off applets will not be looked upon favorably by history.

I wrote a powerful database GUI as an applet, to pick up an update all the user had to do was save their work and hit the refresh button. I used Symantec Visual Cafe.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#172

Post by voltagex_ »

gress wrote: post #161
addyo wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the core values behind this project is that it should work extremely well cross-device and that most definitely means on devices where Chrome isn't the primary browser. During development we've ensured that we test on Firefox OS, Windows phone, iOS and browsers other than Chrome which run on Android. I want to give people something that they can rely on. Chrome isn't the only browser in the world for sure :)

Looks like browsersync is a Chrome only proprietary feature.

http://browsersync.io/ - at least the server side seems to be open.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#173

Post by jh3 »

webXL wrote: post #144
jacquesm wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the theory. The practice is that - you give your precious data to third parties - that the safety problem now shifts from keeping your computer safe to keeping data in the hands of third parties safe (and this does not always play out in the way we would like, see codespaces for a recent example) - that even the client side safety is a problem, the 'distribution advantages' have also been recognized widely by…

> The theory is fantastic, but the practice leaves much to be desired Ok... What is more fantastic for: - large audiences? - users who can't install/update software? - " " can't/don't back up data? - developers who don't have the resources to target multiple devices/platforms? - integrations with other applications?

What's fantastic is your use of " on the Internet. First time I've seen that.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#174

Post by jfoster »

It's always interesting to see the flurry of Google releases in the month leading up to Google IO. My understanding is that projects hold out on releasing in the hopes of being included in the Google IO line-up, but release just prior to (or after) Google IO if they didn't end up making the cut. I don't mean to belittle these projects (this one looks quite good, for example!), just pointing out that you can potentially get a read of Google's current priorities by comparing the projects released surrounding Google IO versus the projects released at Google IO. There are some other factors to be mindful of, such as Google IO's focus on developers, however.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#175

Post by superuser2 »

Throwaway0812 wrote: post #30
addyo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. We don't consider ourselves a Bootstrap competitor, but rather a combination of best practices and tooling when it comes to starting work on new multi-device/mobile web projects. Bootstrap, Zurb and similar libraries provide a great start for prototyping your apps, but one of the biggest challenges with them is that it’s (almost too) easy to get stuck using their styles, look and feel for the lifetime…

"it’s (almost too) easy to get stuck using their styles, look and feel for the lifetime of your application" I'm a developer, and I've never used Bootstrap in my life, but my favorite aspect of Bootstrap is how it brings a sense of familiarity to the web. Why does every website need a unique look and feel? I'd rather not learn a new navigation or layout a hundred times each day. The internet is primarily about conten…

Same. Native applications use relatively standard controls, look, and feel across an OS; why should web applications be different?

Re: Web Starter Kit

#176

Post by snowwrestler »

jacquesm wrote: post #131
ender7 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The shocking, unprecedented, world-changing difference that the web brings is that on the web all you have to do is click a link and your computer downloads, "installs", and runs a program. No manual installation necessary, no upgrades, no installers or wizards. No delay. This process is safe -- the page is sandboxed and can't interfere with the rest of your machine. And these things can be instantly shared! All I ha…

That's the theory. The practice is that - you give your precious data to third parties - that the safety problem now shifts from keeping your computer safe to keeping data in the hands of third parties safe (and this does not always play out in the way we would like, see codespaces for a recent example) - that even the client side safety is a problem, the 'distribution advantages' have also been recognized widely by…

Giving data to third parties is a side effect of networked applications, not web apps specifically. Whether the client is in a browser or a stand-alone native app, if you give it data, it will pass that data back to the application servers.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#177

Post by mythz »

Why does this need to depend on Ruby as well as node.js? As a starter kit shouldn't it aim for the least dependencies to get started?

So for devs who want to use this with another web framework like Python, They need to have node, Ruby and Python installed?

Node is extremely easy to deploy/install that's even self-hostable where you can even check in node.exe (e.g. on Windows) into the repo so no prior installation is necessary. Just run `node install` to pull in all the dependencies and your away. Surely that's the kind of dev experience we should be aiming for?

Are the benefits for SASS over a pure js solution like less that much better to justify the extra infrastructure dependencies?

Re: Web Starter Kit

#178

Post by redact207 »

I've been working on a similar web builder with Entomic - https://www.entomic.com - that lets you create sites and get live previews across different browsers and devices as you develop. It's a little rough still, but it does make responsive development a bit easier.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#179

Post by thinkerer »

I think if this can be extended to make the changes easy to apply (with real time checking of how the output will be) and understanding the code differences, then many of the wireframe companies out there may lose their appeal....

Re: Web Starter Kit

#180

Post by Throwaway618 »

jacquesm wrote: post #146
baddox wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in practice it is much better than any alternative multi-platform instant software installation ecosystem. And in practice, it has led to a thriving ecosystem of applications, most of which can link to each other and will work on a large portion of users' devices.

Yes, absolutely true. But I can't help thinking that there must be a better way to achieve these goals than this mess we've made. We're clearly in 'we should be amazed the pig dances at all' territory rather than in 'look how good the pig can dance'.

There are no other dancers; there are only pigs.
Post reply on HN