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

Skip is now free and open source

skip.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 235 posts

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#191

Post by antonvs »

msie wrote: post #140
nodja wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been programming since ~1999 and anecdataly don't remember programmers having a culture of paying for their dev tools. On linux everything's free, and on windows I've used a plethora of freeware IDEs/compilers/etc. from turbo pascal, dev c++ (that's the name of it), later on eclipse took the stage in it's buggy mess and right before vscode there was atom. The only people that I know that used visual studio eithe…

Well, I've been programming since 1986 and I had to buy all the compilers I used. For the Mac: Lightspeed Pascal, Lightspeed C and Metrowerks. I wish I had the money to buy MPW. Linux then was just a glint in Linus's eyes. We didn't have the internet with easy access to pirated software. I didn't do BB's so I don't know about that area. Once I went to uni in the 90's I started using Usenet but even then I didn't down…

I remember paying something like $400-500 for Glockenspiel C++ for MS-DOS, which was based on AT&T's cfront and compiled to C code. Not long after that, Turbo C++ and Zortech C++ made things a lot easier, since they didn't compile through C, like cfront did. Those were in the $150-200 range, iirc. I also remember paying for PC-YACC from Abraxas, something like $400.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#192

Post by holoduke »

NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #108
holoduke wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well sorry. But Android UI is bad just bad. The settings, the menus. Its bloated and almost as if they deliberately made it annoying to use. It just sucks.

[flagged]

Maybe go back to reddit. thats the place for cult obsessed ones.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#193

Post by bilekas »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #91
nsm wrote: post #70

> The plain truth is that developers expect to get their tools free of charge. This is an accurate, but damning indictment of how some of the most highly paid workers on the planet won't pay for tools. Unlike nearly every other profession. Folks, if you can afford it, please pay for quality software, instead of relying on FAANG and VC money to keep the tools going!

The highest quality tools in the software development space tend to be FOSS, because unlike any other field, we are employed in the field that makes the tools our field uses, and distribution and manufacturing costs are zero. People build tools that they want to use, then share it with others because it's free to. If the rest of the economy worked like this we would be in full-blown utopia. Selling software to softwa…

> People build tools that they want to use, then share it with others because it's free to. If the rest of the economy worked like this we would be in full-blown utopia.

But the rest of the economy doesn't work like this, so support your OSS projects financially.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#194

Post by dustingetz »

nsm wrote: post #70

> The plain truth is that developers expect to get their tools free of charge. This is an accurate, but damning indictment of how some of the most highly paid workers on the planet won't pay for tools. Unlike nearly every other profession. Folks, if you can afford it, please pay for quality software, instead of relying on FAANG and VC money to keep the tools going!

Jetbrains

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#195

Post by gdiamos »

nsm wrote: post #70

> The plain truth is that developers expect to get their tools free of charge. This is an accurate, but damning indictment of how some of the most highly paid workers on the planet won't pay for tools. Unlike nearly every other profession. Folks, if you can afford it, please pay for quality software, instead of relying on FAANG and VC money to keep the tools going!

Here’s another perspective. Developers aren’t budget approvers in engineering organizations by choice.

If you are a budget approver then your inbox and calendar are full of sales teams.

I find that experience is too distracting to concentrate on writing good code.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#196

Post by dirkc »

nsm wrote: post #70

> The plain truth is that developers expect to get their tools free of charge. This is an accurate, but damning indictment of how some of the most highly paid workers on the planet won't pay for tools. Unlike nearly every other profession. Folks, if you can afford it, please pay for quality software, instead of relying on FAANG and VC money to keep the tools going!

It's not that I don't want to pay for good tools. I don't want to invest time and effort into tools that I have to pay for.

If a tool requires payment, someone is gatekeeping access to that tool. Even if prices and terms seem reasonable today, there's no guarantee that they will be in the future.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#197

Post by Krizzu »

marcprux wrote: post #37
kwanbix wrote: post #21

I just started to learn Kotlin, how does it compare with Kotlin Multi Platform for those that used both?

Good question. I'll try to answer as objectively as possible, despite my bias towards Skip's approach. Kotlin Multiplatform (KMP) enables you to target different platforms with your Kotlin. In the context of mobile apps, it allows you to compile your Kotlin to a native framework for iOS, so you can reuse your business logic. On iOS, the Kotlin is running in its own little garbage-collected runtime, but it sets up a b…

I had a very quick glance at docs website, from Comparison page it says it uses native components, which is great. However, I did not find anything related to platform specific API usage, such as embedding camera into your view or using notification groups/channels? Is there a way to "offload" these parts to android, similar to what CMP allows you to do? (You can embed native iOS views inside Compose view or use expect/actual)

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#198

Post by [deleted] »

nsm wrote: post #70

> The plain truth is that developers expect to get their tools free of charge. This is an accurate, but damning indictment of how some of the most highly paid workers on the planet won't pay for tools. Unlike nearly every other profession. Folks, if you can afford it, please pay for quality software, instead of relying on FAANG and VC money to keep the tools going!

[deleted]

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#199

Post by gman83 »

marcprux wrote: post #44
agentifysh wrote: post #34

This is a welcome addition but why should Flutter devs use this ? Seems like it requires 32gb of ram! Also Flutter is already very mature and can produce not only near-native mobile apps (the difference is almost negligible) but can target desktop and even web applications. I do wonder how much of a boost skip offers vs Flutter's mobile apps. Will give skip a try when dram prices normalize.

See my response below on the KMP question: the comparison with CMP mostly applies to Flutter as well. > near-native mobile apps (the difference is almost negligible) Not as of the advent of Liquid Glass on iOS (and, to a lesser extent, Material Expressive on Android). Flutter isn't going to be implementing these new interface conventions[1], and so the UI for these apps are stuck on the last generation and are alread…

Flutter is undergoing a major refactor where they're decoupling Material and Cupertino into separate packages. This is the reason why they're not implementing those new conventions right away. The way you've framed it is pretty disingenuous.

Re: Skip is now free and open source

#200

Post by croon »

d0liver wrote: post #158
eucyclos wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they mean cost of incremental units. 0->1 is much more expensive than 1->100 in software, unlike with things like lattes or houses

I assumed that they meant "cost of production", since that's what you give to keep your money, so that includes 0->1. But if what they meant is what you said then I'd say that the cost of 0->1 is not somehow less important. Software does make 1->100 much more accessible though, so, in that way, you have an opportunity to help out very small businesses in a way that you can't in other industries, which is even more of…

I think the comparison to other industries is that while they pay for tools, it's not the inventor of the hammer that gets paid, but the producer of the unit, which in software is ~0. I'm not arguing against paying/donating to FOSS, but I do support the discrete distinction to physical tools.
Post reply on HN