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

Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

grokcode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#41

Post by cageface »

studiofellow wrote: post #24

(Disclaimer: I'm the author of one of the books linked at the end of the post.) Design is not just important for usability, but also for marketing. If you have an awesome framework, you have to get the word out so people know about it and want to use it. It's not the same kind of marketing a business uses because it's not directly tied to revenue, but it is important if you want said framework to be used and its surr…

When one option is overwhelmingly technically superior to another you can afford to ignore design, marketing and human psychology. Python and Ruby are close enough to interchangeable for web work that these other factors can be critical.

Personally I'm really tired of hearing programmers dismiss the importance of aesthetics and branding. They can easily have more impact than all those technical details you spend so much time sweating over. Like it or not, humans are not cooly rational decision makers.

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#42

Post by kmfrk »

Some minor nitpicks first:

1. Blogofile is a de facto abandoned project. The project's inherent bugginess is a testament to the fact that the author had more important priorities to address than the design of the site.

2. Comparing Google's App Engine with Heroku is absurd and seems like a sign that the number of data points is so small that comparisons don't make much sense in the first place.

I agree that Python sites look hideous - and have often wondered whether someone should make an alternative style sheet - but I have a feeling the Python community's problem is not that of design, but legacy. As bland as Django's and Python's documentation looks, Pythonistas have come to learn where things are and how they work.

I don't know if migrating the websites of Django and Python to something new would be a good idea, especially when it comes to preserving links for directing to dead ends.

I'd rather that someone did a CSS userstyle than to see the sites get redesigned, because I think it would break more than it improves. If the CSS and HTML could be improved without any changes to URLs, then that would be even better, of course. We can't pretend the changes aren't retroactive.

Maybe someone could do a fork of the sites and apply the changes they want?

As someone said, maybe the Python people just decided to spend their time writing good documentation instead of creating a good-looking front-end? There are only so many people and resources to go around, especially in one-man projects like Blogofile. As chance would have it, I actually use Blogofile over all the alternatives, meagre design or not. Maybe I share sensibilities with the Blogofile and Python guys that don't translate to good-looking websites?

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#43

Post by Trufa »

cageface wrote: post #38
davidu wrote: post #9

Misleading title. Link Bait. What does the aesthetics of a web page have to do with the quality of the language? If the usability is in question, that's one thing -- but the author isn't arguing the less "Sexy" (his words) sites are less usable, simply less attractive to him. Who cares? If you pick a language based on the sexiness of various websites that are related to the language, you are probably not in the right…

Good design is a signal. If the people behind a product took the time to make something look good it's likely that they sweated the other details too. Especially when two products are close to functionally interchangeable, like Ruby and Python, design can be decisive. Engineers chronically underestimate the importance of design and marketing.

This is true, I'm really more likely to put my credit card in a website that looks awesome than in one that doesn't. It immediately gives you some sense of trust.

Disclaimer: you should't base your credit card use only on design!

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#44

Post by dancablam »

The astounding number of devs asking "who cares?" sums up one of my biggest pet peeves. Would you buy a car that had a modern engine but a chassis and interior from 1983? Maybe if you wanted to save a few bucks - but your friends would still tease you for owning an old clunker.

True, Python is a beautiful language that's stayed modern in the face of the evolving web, and I've come across many Python sites that do look really slick. But if the face of the Python community tends to lean towards the look and feel of 1997 Geocities pages, where are new developers going to flock? If you care about your community you should foster it by showcasing the fact that Python more than keeps pace with the modern web instead of subconsciously suggesting to budding programmers that your language is stuck in the 90's.

Also, PHP community, I'm speaking to you as well. Your PHP homepage, pecl, and pear sites (although easy enough to navigate) are in desperate need of a modern design.

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#45

Post by viraptor »

cageface wrote: post #38
davidu wrote: post #9

Misleading title. Link Bait. What does the aesthetics of a web page have to do with the quality of the language? If the usability is in question, that's one thing -- but the author isn't arguing the less "Sexy" (his words) sites are less usable, simply less attractive to him. Who cares? If you pick a language based on the sexiness of various websites that are related to the language, you are probably not in the right…

Good design is a signal. If the people behind a product took the time to make something look good it's likely that they sweated the other details too. Especially when two products are close to functionally interchangeable, like Ruby and Python, design can be decisive. Engineers chronically underestimate the importance of design and marketing.

Ruby and Python are. But look at the origin of popularity. Python was popular in academia / system scripts for a long time. Ruby's popularity comes in a large part from Rails.

Now guess which community has better graphical design skills? Or from the other end - all other things being equal (and of course they aren't in reality, there are many small differences), I'd rather use a language designed by someone who specialises in designing programming languages rather than one creating websites.

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#46

Post by gitarr »

xutopia wrote: post #6
gitarr wrote: post #2

I prefer the style of Python to the ones of Ruby anyday. I also prefer the style of Hackernews/Reddit to the one of Digg. Digg may look better , but its style and content is what i don't like.

Your two last sentences contradict one another. I think you are mixing up style/looks with content.

No, style has nothing to do with superficial looks.

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#47

Post by joshklein »

scott_s wrote: post #5

I have to strongly disagree on the documentation. The Python online documentation for the language ( http://docs.python.org/reference/index.html ) and the standard library ( http://docs.python.org/library/index.html ) are a pleasure to read and navigate. And, easily Googlable; the search "python docs x " on Google usually has the Python documentation for x as the top hit.

This is thanks to Sphinx (http://sphinx.pocoo.org/) and the kind of community participation Python is famous for.

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#48

Post by rikthevik »

tripzilch wrote: post #26
mazelife wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? In my experience, Django has about the best documentation of any open source web framework. How are the docs lacking? The site's focus is definitely developer-centric. It would be nice if there was either a broader focus on that site or an alternative entry port for non-developer folks--particularly non-technical decision makers.

> Really? In my experience, Django has about the best documentation of any open source web framework. How are the docs lacking? It's been a few years so I don't recall exactly (and maybe it has improved) but I just found myself browsing and clicking around to re-read particular chapters all the time, that I could only reach via an unintuitive sequence of 2 or 3 clicks. Only when I found that the docstrings inside Dja…

Yeah, when you start digging into Django, there's just no substitute for a good IDE (PyCharm for me) that lets you dive into the source. The source never lies. :)

Re: Dear Python, Why Are You So Ugly?

#49

Post by cageface »

viraptor wrote: post #45
cageface wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good design is a signal. If the people behind a product took the time to make something look good it's likely that they sweated the other details too. Especially when two products are close to functionally interchangeable, like Ruby and Python, design can be decisive. Engineers chronically underestimate the importance of design and marketing.

Ruby and Python are. But look at the origin of popularity. Python was popular in academia / system scripts for a long time. Ruby's popularity comes in a large part from Rails. Now guess which community has better graphical design skills? Or from the other end - all other things being equal (and of course they aren't in reality, there are many small differences), I'd rather use a language designed by someone who speci…

I'd rather use a language designed by someone who specialises in designing programming languages rather than one creating websites.

Are you referring to PHP or something? Certainly Matz is every bit the language designer Guido is. Like it or not, Python and Ruby are competing in a lot of very similar niches. Fluffing the design of your webpages is like stopping at the 24th mile of a marathon.

Post reply on HN