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

Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

macaw.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

#32

Post by bryans »

hackula1 wrote: post #7
th0br0 wrote: post #2

I had actually expected something for "real" code. (e.g. Scala, Go, younameit) While CSS3/HTML5 definitely made web design somewhat closer to actual coding (esp. on the CSS end), I still find it difficult to call renderer instructions in a markup language true "code". However, this looks like an interesting tool! Too bad that you only seem to be aiming for OSX. Are ports planned?

The headline should replace "code" with "markup" for clarity.

It's more than a submission title problem. The tagline they're using for the product is actually "the code-savvy web design tool". Perhaps I'm just an unreasonable person (it is just a single world, after all), but I have trouble getting behind any product for which the creators can't accurately describe.

Re: Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

#33

Post by GhotiFish »

wasabian wrote: post #5
th0br0 wrote: post #2

I had actually expected something for "real" code. (e.g. Scala, Go, younameit) While CSS3/HTML5 definitely made web design somewhat closer to actual coding (esp. on the CSS end), I still find it difficult to call renderer instructions in a markup language true "code". However, this looks like an interesting tool! Too bad that you only seem to be aiming for OSX. Are ports planned?

OSX and Windows seems to be the targeted platforms according to their Kickstarter FAQ. > We have no plans to bring Macaw to Linux at this time. Once the Mac and Windows versions are released we will look into Linux. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/macaw/macaw-the-code-sav...

I can understand not paying any mind to linux for other developers. It's a mostly unused platform for almost all demographics... except actual developers.

This is not the kind of application I was expecting to "not support linux". That said, They're not actually supporting windows right now either, so I guess for designers only. Oh well.

Re: Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

#35

Post by asciimo »

GhotiFish wrote: post #31

> We have no plans to bring Macaw to Linux at this time. Once the Mac and Windows versions are released we will look into Linux. damn it .

Their language was slightly more optimistic in this October 10 comment:

> There is definitely a chance we will port Macaw over to Linux. We are working on getting the Mac and Windows versions out first then we will re-evaluate.

Re: Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

#37

Post by cseelus »

evmar wrote: post #22

This looks really neat. It also helps me understand why so many websites look bad on non-Mac platforms (aka 90% of desktops): designers who do stuff like "that looks a bit heavy, let's bump down the font weight a bit" without realizing that these settings look unreadable on Windows or Linux.

On Low-Res devices running Linux or Windows, that is.

Re: Macaw – Code-savvy web design tool

#38

Post by icambron »

mikeash wrote: post #30
icambron wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a textural representation of instructions for a computer; it's certainly code. I think the distinction you're looking for is whether writing HTML/CSS/etc constitutes programming or not. That's a recurring discussion on HN (I've personally come around to the view that it is).

Seems like a pointless definitional quibble. What matters is that when people see "code" used as a verb in this context on this site, they think of programming. Whether that's "what it means" or not doesn't really matter.

Descriptivism is all well and good, but I don't think your definition of the word is well established, even in this context. Did I miss a vote or something?

What this whole thing sounds like is, "I unilaterally made up my own definition of a word and I will correct people who don't use it that way and everyone who disagrees with me is just quibbling."

And regardless of the relative popularity of that usage, I can't see how I'm the one with the "pointless definitional quibble", since the context is someone calling out the author for using something other than their favorite definition of "code".

Post reply on HN