151–160 of 180 posts
String(0, "=0:no birds|=1:1 bird|# birds") // "no birds"
String(1, "=0:no birds|=1:1 bird|# birds") // "1 bird"
String(2, "=0:no birds|=1:1 bird|# birds") // "2 birds"
[For translation you can imagine that we replace the literal string with a string code.]
This is still more work, of course, but having it built-in to the language is super-useful.
And working at uptight places that focus more on the garnish than the actual meal, suck.
It's a tradeoff. I love projects where I can "sweat the details" and refine not just wording but typography, padding, visual alignment, layout, edge cases, colors, workflow, etc. And where the back-end, QA, doc teams are similarly able to hone their work to perfection. But I know that this isn't always Pareto optimal. Sometimes your user, customer, and business are better off if you swallow your pride and deliver an…
As a software product manager, UX is one of the areas I’m inclined to spend more time and money than strictly necessary. Details and polish matter. Users can tell the difference, even if it’s subconsciously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ouch. Unfortunately I don't think I will. I'll probably always be hired by someone else to build a shared vision and aspire to do it as well as I possibly can :)
I didn't mean that to be demeaning at all. I seriously urge you to implement that vision even as a bootstrapped side project to your main gig. If you want to "build something (you're) proud to sign (your) name on", chances are whatever you build will display that authenticity, which will either resonate with customers or not. People love authenticity, perhaps customers not so much. The market can be brutal and just b…
I actually agree with the sentiment in your first comment. These aren't what defines if a company is successful. A good experience, care and craftsmanship are important, but not company defining.
I have decided for myself that most company defining areas are not where I want to gain expertise in (focused user research, finding PMF, funding, GTM, sales, marketing, etc) - I'm passionate about tech and am intentional about excellence in this area.
Which is why I will probably never establish a company. But of course I can lead a team to do good technical work and would like coworkers who do the same. One can dream ;)
The essence of this post is about craftsmanship, value, and caring about what you're doing. It's really hard to put this into words. There's certainly a gradient and trade-offs to be made. In most businesses, the priority is to make money. This is not bad. Business owners deserve to make money for their efforts. It's always been the case that "bean counters" will optimize to increase profits. If you want a superior p…
You lost me here. Probably because mass produced usually means much more thought went into the product rather than a reduced run product. I personally have a lot of respect for mass produced stuff, especially the one well designed.
It's a tradeoff. I love projects where I can "sweat the details" and refine not just wording but typography, padding, visual alignment, layout, edge cases, colors, workflow, etc. And where the back-end, QA, doc teams are similarly able to hone their work to perfection. But I know that this isn't always Pareto optimal. Sometimes your user, customer, and business are better off if you swallow your pride and deliver an…
Agreed! But I suspect several of these decisions are not intentionally made and are "...meh, whatever".
Though if you support languages other than English even the decision to simplify pluralization logic to n==1 seems like a form of "...meh, whatever" given various pluralization rules: https://cldr.unicode.org/index/cldr-spec/plural-rules
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I do, is have two different formats in the translation tokens. As an example, this app[0], is currently only localized in English, but I still use tokens, whenever I do apps, so the base localization[1] has stuff like this: "SLUG-CLEANTIME-DIVIDER" = "\nThis is "; "SLUG-PREFIX-CLEANTIME-YEAR-EXACT" = "exactly one year."; "SLUG-PREFIX-CLEANTIME-YEARS-EXACT" = "exactly %d years."; "SLUG-PREFIX-CLEANTIME-YEAR" = "o…
From the little Ukrainian I know, I do know that they have 3 forms for the word year ("рік" pronounced r-ee-k). There is one that matches the English singular "рік" (but you'd also use it for e.g. 21 years), and there is one "роки" which is used for quantities 2, 3 and 4 (but also 22, 23 and 24) and another plural form "років" for the other quantities. [0] So, the few lines of the localisation you posted don't work f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed! But I suspect several of these decisions are not intentionally made and are "...meh, whatever".
Fair enough, and honestly I agree with you that supporting the n==1 case is the bare minimum of care I'd expect from an application developer. Though if you support languages other than English even the decision to simplify pluralization logic to n==1 seems like a form of "...meh, whatever" given various pluralization rules: https://cldr.unicode.org/index/cldr-spec/plural-rules
Files deleted: {0 or 1 or 1,000,000}
This is the Californian Ideology in a blog post. The implication that title and intro mean to imply is working for companies that build products that are not evil and hostile to their users. But the call to action is to.. embed logic in the programs to pluralize properly (in English). It's possible to write evil software that pluralizes words. It's possible to write beneficial software that does not pluralize words.…
I am baffled why you are inserting good and evil into this. He just seems to want to work at companies that value craft and attention to detail. It just like the jobs quote about the back of the furniture also being attractive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, your comment probably exemplifies the “Californian Ideology” the parent comment is criticizing. “Why would you consider good or evil when talking about how you want to spend the overwhelming majority of your productive life”.
Who is saying not consider doing good? Can’t there be more than one thing you consider? Do you going into this rant when a coworker asks about vacation days too?
Is it that you don't want to consider evil, then? I'm not sure how you can consider good without considering evil.
>Do you going into this rant when a coworker asks about vacation days too?
Are you always this obnoxiously dismissive to your coworkers?