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

There's never been a better time to build websites

simeongriggs.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 337 posts

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#191

Post by [deleted] »

ajlburke wrote: post #93
hooby wrote: post #92

It's definitely a great time to build websites, but saying they _NEVER_ have been easier to make... I'm not 100% sure about that. Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html…

Hacker News still uses tables - for layout ! But it always loads super fast, and it just works. We figured out how to display text on a web page decades ago. It's a shame more people aren't just doing it the direct way anymore. (Applications are a different matter obviously)

[deleted]

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#192

Post by 888666 »

thomasahle wrote: post #178
_fat_santa wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html tags? The thing is you can still do all of this. But we have since built tools and frameworks to let you still do this, while g…

> The thing is you can still do all of this. But we have since built tools and frameworks to let you still do this, while giving you superpowers. I think Svelte is the best example of this. You can create a dead simple site with it and have the result you are talking about I don't know. I just tried to use Netlify to upload a simple static Html/Javascript page I made. Now I'm trying to figure out CORS errors. Pretty…

I used https://neocities.org/ recently to make a simple static html website with no issues and no configuration. And I'm someone who usually uses the more "advanced" stuff. It's nice having the freedom to chase a little nostalgia sometimes.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#193

Post by runarberg »

_fat_santa wrote: post #141
hooby wrote: post #92

It's definitely a great time to build websites, but saying they _NEVER_ have been easier to make... I'm not 100% sure about that. Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html…

> Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html tags? The thing is you can still do all of this. But we have since built tools and frameworks to let you still do this, while g…

Question: Are people using tailwind for layout? Even when CSS grid is available? If so what is the benefit of tailwind layouts over modern CSS, beyond what tailwinds usually brings?

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#194

Post by jokethrowaway »

_fat_santa wrote: post #141
hooby wrote: post #92

It's definitely a great time to build websites, but saying they _NEVER_ have been easier to make... I'm not 100% sure about that. Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html…

> Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html tags? The thing is you can still do all of this. But we have since built tools and frameworks to let you still do this, while g…

The problem is that expectations changed, so now you're "required" to do more in certain contexts.

I absolutely loath frontend developments in companies with more than 5 engineers. In the past you may have found some spaghetti code and various abuses of jQuery but you could probably grasp the codebase in an afternoon. Nowadays every mid company codebase is a spaceship. For sure, you'll find a pseudo technical VP of engineering which enable whatever cool technology to be used and resume driven developers happy to pile on the latest Big Tech framework - which is likely to be an over-engineered, over complicated exercise in engineer retention and engineer roles marketing.

Then you have Pieter Levels pulling a mil per year with PHP and jQuery.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#195

Post by lc9er »

zeepzeep wrote: post #33
marcus_holmes wrote: post #3

I have a feeling that this is the next religious war in dev. I read this article and shudder in horror at, well, all of it. I like static sites (that wouldn't take minutes to build if they were written in a decent language). Adding lots and lots of JS dependencies and frameworks gives me the screaming ab-dabs - it's just adding complexity and dependency. I like writing code, not plumbing together bits of other people…

> I like writing code, not plumbing together bits of other people's code with bizarre config files I don't like reinventing the wheel every time I build something

“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”

-Carl Sagan

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#196

Post by post-it »

oblio wrote: post #179
ajlburke wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hacker News still uses tables - for layout ! But it always loads super fast, and it just works. We figured out how to display text on a web page decades ago. It's a shame more people aren't just doing it the direct way anymore. (Applications are a different matter obviously)

And if you try it on mobile, it's mostly crap. Let's not treat HTML tables as being some super special ability. If HN were implemented exactly the same but with flexbox or grid for layout, it would be objectively better with no drawbacks I can think of.

HN is fantastic on mobile. Much better than Reddit, even old.reddit and i.reddit.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#197

Post by g8oz »

oblio wrote: post #179
ajlburke wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hacker News still uses tables - for layout ! But it always loads super fast, and it just works. We figured out how to display text on a web page decades ago. It's a shame more people aren't just doing it the direct way anymore. (Applications are a different matter obviously)

And if you try it on mobile, it's mostly crap. Let's not treat HTML tables as being some super special ability. If HN were implemented exactly the same but with flexbox or grid for layout, it would be objectively better with no drawbacks I can think of.

I dunno, it looks great on Firefox mobile.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#198

Post by Mezzie »

leephillips wrote: post #186
Mezzie wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, tailwind might make css a lot easier, and github copilot might make coding a lot faster... but is this really easier than in the early 90ies, when you could just type into notepad and make a website that didn't require any CSS or images or JS or even more than just the most basic html tags? I mean you still can, it's just that nobody's going to hire you to do that and nobody is going to be impressed by it. Eve…

“no responsive design (remember designing 3 different sites to deal with the 460x640, 600x800, and 1280x1024 resolutions?” Using media queries with breakpoints, and doing exactly what you describe, was the original “responsive design”. What you have in mind (I think) is what might be called “fluid design”—responsive design without media queries. You could always do this to some extent with such things as inline block…

Thanks for the correction/deep dive here. I was a kid + don't have an official education in cs, so I mix up terminology and what things were called sometimes.

I remember when media queries came out. It was so nice. Amazing. 10/10 for the time. You can do a lot with auto-margins and other ancient CSS, but there are definitely quite a lot of limits. (Sighs in someone who does a lot of email design and academic CMS design... let's party like it's 1999...)

> There is also some advantage to making separate designs carefully crafted for a variety of screen shapes, that you give up with fluid design techniques.

I agree strongly with this from a UX/UI point of view and as an educator.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#199

Post by post-it »

rambambram wrote: post #95
randmeerkat wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course you can choose to put your website on AWS and svck on the bolls of Jeff a little. But you don't have to! And that's what all kinds of young devs just miss. Where are you hosting your websites?

It's called webhosting at a hosting provider. ;) It works for me like this since the 90's. Here in Europe there are literally hundreds or thousands of webhosts. Some pricier, some faster, some cheaper. I host some websites at Antagonist in The Netherlands. But I'm strongly considering moving, although they are by far the fastest and most reliable party I've seen. Why? Because they - just like a lot of other European…

Smaller web hosts tend to use AWS on the backend. Sometimes they use Azure or OVH, but they rarely have their own datacentre.

Re: There's never been a better time to build websites

#200

Post by rambambram »

hbn wrote: post #113
rambambram wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So true! I hear small businesses and freelancers complain about being kicked of Twitter, OnlyFans, Youtube, Facebook, etc. One might not immediately make money with a website (although you sure can!), but the moment you are kicked of some platform, you have a safe haven to fall back on. A place where you can share the same textual or visual media with your visitors(/followers/friends/fans/connections). But instead of…

> One might not immediately make money with a website (although you sure can!) Not if you get banned from payment processors. Which is a thing that certainly happens

True. This might be less problematic for freelancers or small businesses in Europe though. Paying by regular bank transfer is easily possible between all member states (and even more countries!). All you need is - and everybody has - an IBAN bank account. Not even your administration has to be adapted for international business (as long as you don't grow that big). The only downside is waiting one meager business day for your money, so it's not really instant payment.

I don't know about the US, South America, Asia or Russia, but I guess people have good old bank accounts, have an internetbanking app installed on their smartphone, and sometimes have to pay money to a neighboring country? It might not be as easy as here, or just completely different, but I guess there are ways to skip payment processors, as the fee-stealing middle man that a lot of people take for granted.

Post reply on HN