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

Why build another website builder?

makeswift.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 89 posts

Re: Why build another website builder?

#31

Post by migueloller »

oregontechninja wrote: post #3

I do think we need better website designers for lay-people. I have a couple key points I would want in a web designer. -Output accessibility (eg for blind users) -Clean and efficient output html (every square space site I visit is slow as shit) -No cdn resources. Allows you to pack your own fonts and assets. Does this do that?

> -Output accessibility (eg for blind users)

This is something that's in our roadmap. Makeswift components are just React components and as only developers of those components at the moment we plan to follow accessibility best practices.

>-Clean and efficient output html (every square space site I visit is slow as shit)

Again, because the components are just React components, it's a matter of keeping markup clean in the components themselves. This is something that I think we could do a better job at right now. But we will definitely improve and there's a clear path for it.

-No cdn resources. Allows you to pack your own fonts and assets.

We're currently focused on delivering a great out-of-the-box experience so we take care of that for all of our customers. In the future we plan to open up an API that will allow developers so extend Makeswift however they see fit, including writing their own components, panels, and integration with assets, etc. This would allow you to pick your own custom fonts and assets.

That being said, today we do support custom snippets that you can add to your pages as well as an Embed component. With these you can bring your own "anything".

Re: Why build another website builder?

#32

Post by migueloller »

ylere wrote: post #29
oregontechninja wrote: post #3

I do think we need better website designers for lay-people. I have a couple key points I would want in a web designer. -Output accessibility (eg for blind users) -Clean and efficient output html (every square space site I visit is slow as shit) -No cdn resources. Allows you to pack your own fonts and assets. Does this do that?

Clean and efficient output is my biggest gripe with many of the current builders. I would like to add: - good multi-language support

Internationalization is definitely a big one. It's a hard thing to do right for a website builder designed for non-technical people, though.

That being said, I'm proud to currently have customers that have built sites in over 5 different languages, that I know of.

Re: Why build another website builder?

#33

Post by Timpy »

OutsmartDan wrote: post #27

Developers hate these tools for a reason: they're the ones maintaining it after it's been deployed. The whole concept of "no-code website builder" ultimately goes back to "where is the code and how do we modify or integrate it with our current systems". Maybe if it was marketed as a "fast prototyping" tool, I'd be more on board with the product.

The SAAS I work for started out as the owner building pages on whatever dreamweaver was popular 15 years ago, and that templating engine still haunts us today. Our development cycle is painfully slow because of all of the copy-pasting that happened in the code base before a team with modern sensibilities got their hands on it. I have nightmares about nested tables for layout and inline CSS.

Re: Why build another website builder?

#34

Post by migueloller »

codegeek wrote: post #25
migueloller wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could say Webflow is a direct competitor, yes. The way we see it, though, Webflow is a tad too complex for non-technical users and you end up just shifting the bottleneck from developers to the "Webflow expert". Heck, they have a whole Webflow University for learning how to use the product. We believe there is an opportunity to build a website builder that is much more flexible than the usual template-driven ones…

Great. Would love an invite if you are up for it.

Of course! You can find my contact info in my HN profile. Feel free to reach out and I'll get you one :)

Re: Why build another website builder?

#35

Post by karimf »

capableweb wrote: post #26
apledger3 wrote: post #2

Hey everyone! With what seems like a new website builder popping up every week, I'm often asked the same question. Why build another one? Here's my answer. We're starting to invite people to our early access program and would love your feedback.

Thanks for sharing your project, certainly looks like an interesting start! Quick feedback, it seems you forgot to answer the question "Why build another one" before submitting your comment, I'm still awaiting your answer :)

I'm guessing they are referring to the article linked on this submission.

Re: Why build another website builder?

#36

Post by im3w1l »

sfpoet wrote: post #14
detritus wrote: post #7

From https://www.makeswift.com/early-access : > Can I host a Makeswift site elsewhere? > Makeswift code can't be exported. Every page created in Makeswift is securely hosted and served via Google Cloud. I'm sorry, maybe I'm just being absolutist and cranky, but this doesn't sound to me like it's a 'website builder' - it's a tool that allows users to create presentations that can be displayed on the web. I get why you…

No, you are right on. It's really a bespoke to techstars_ solution for Google Cloud. When I think I web, I think HTML and HTTP and all the resources that can be accessed under those two. Note, the web can also be SFTP and a plethora of other resources. The lock-in here is created by a clever use of the word "Web." It's the same use that allowed marketers at Netscape to call LiveScript JavaScript because it would sell…

Javascript could interact with, script if we are being charitable, Java applets through LiveConnect.

Re: Why build another website builder?

#37

Post by dvdhsu »

teilo wrote: post #28

I realize this sort of tool targets a completely different audience, but what we desperately need is not more no-code builders, but a robust, DB-backed builder with an object-based workflow, and with code-behind for custom workflow logic. Like something that can compete with Zoho Creator, but is actually engineered in a sane manner, and offered at a sane price. It would take the market by storm. Most of the solutions…

Hi there! That's what we're working on with Retool (https://retool.com) It's, as you say, a "DB-backed" (or API-backed) front-end builder that's designed specifically for engineers. We don't store any data, and you can customize the front-end by importing your own React components or by writing JS.

(I made it, so feel free to ping me if you have any feedback: david AT retool)

Re: Why build another website builder?

#39

Post by thatguyagain »

apledger3 wrote: post #2

Hey everyone! With what seems like a new website builder popping up every week, I'm often asked the same question. Why build another one? Here's my answer. We're starting to invite people to our early access program and would love your feedback.

Hi :)

Cool project. So do you mind actually answering the question of _why_ building another one? Just curious.

Post reply on HN