The Return of Fancy Tools
macwright.com
The Return of Fancy Tools
1–10 of 224 posts
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#2Good games should be easy to approach and difficult to master.
Good tools should be easy to approach with the ability to customize and do more advanced actions, but never difficult
Good tools and products encapsulate complexity but still allow access to it where needed.
Good tools aim to simplify complexity, not complexify simplicity.
Good engineers and product people make tools that aim to simplify. Make it approachable to a n00b/junior but no bullshit for the experienced, or at least the ability to turn off the bullshit and lock-in. Always aim to abstract complexity into simplicity, that is the job.
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#3Google cache link: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gnWsEk...
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#4Good games should be easy to approach and difficult to master . Good tools should be easy to approach with the ability to customize and do more advanced actions, but never difficult Good tools and products encapsulate complexity but still allow access to it where needed. Good tools aim to simplify complexity, not complexify simplicity. Good engineers and product people make tools that aim to simplify. Make it approac…
I don't think good tools are necessarily easy to approach. Some of the best tools I know have quite a steep learning curve. A good tool is one that gives you power. It makes difficult and complicated tasks easy and simple. It may come with the cost of getting good with using the tool, but once you master it, you don't know how you lived without it.
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#5Good games should be easy to approach and difficult to master . Good tools should be easy to approach with the ability to customize and do more advanced actions, but never difficult Good tools and products encapsulate complexity but still allow access to it where needed. Good tools aim to simplify complexity, not complexify simplicity. Good engineers and product people make tools that aim to simplify. Make it approac…
I don't think good tools are necessarily easy to approach. Some of the best tools I know have quite a steep learning curve. A good tool is one that gives you power. It makes difficult and complicated tasks easy and simple. It may come with the cost of getting good with using the tool, but once you master it, you don't know how you lived without it.
There's a lot of truth to this. I feel like I'm willing to really dig in and learn a tool if I can sense that the power of wielding that tool will be commensurate with the difficulty learning it.
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#6Must admit my comment is spurred by the first few words but my god Dreamweaver was so good in the early 2000's.
I actually got introduced to it in ICT lessons at high school.
Oh Adobe. The memory of their software is so nostalgic. Don't get me started, I'll be talking about macromedia shockwave next...
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#7> JIRA was replaced by GitHub issues
This is absolutely... not the case.
Sure, for some kinds of projects Github Issues might do, but for anything "real" Github's issue and project management is a serious regression.
---
These tools are not replacing anything, but addressing broader and broader markets. They lower the barrier to entry and bring more people into the fold (perhaps at the expense at having a lower ceiling of functionality).
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#8I equate this "swinging pendulum" to be more akin to optimization than just back and forth between two foci. Imagine that the problem space lies in a multidimensional landscape and humans are trying to evaluate (explore) in various directions to see which works the best. Usually, it sticks and its an obvious solution. But many things are a regression. As technologists, we should strive to have optics for this sort of thing - sometimes old things are actually better. We went down the wrong slope and need to walk back to the previous peak and try again.
Those who do not understand this tend to stick people into two buckets and then start an unending argument streak. Recognize that going back is 100% foolproof by definition - hindsight is perfect and going forward is a toss-up. If you can evaluate and have a good measure for current vs. old, don't be afraid to leap backwards. Startups should exploit hindsight and they do.
There are also stagnant local optima that we need to really go out there to find a new peak. These we coin as revolutionary technologies that change history forever.
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#9> JIRA was replaced by GitHub issues This is absolutely... not the case. Sure, for some kinds of projects Github Issues might do, but for anything "real" Github's issue and project management is a serious regression. --- These tools are not replacing anything, but addressing broader and broader markets. They lower the barrier to entry and bring more people into the fold (perhaps at the expense at having a lower ceili…
If only it _was_ the case!
Re: The Return of Fancy Tools
#10> JIRA was replaced by GitHub issues This is absolutely... not the case. Sure, for some kinds of projects Github Issues might do, but for anything "real" Github's issue and project management is a serious regression. --- These tools are not replacing anything, but addressing broader and broader markets. They lower the barrier to entry and bring more people into the fold (perhaps at the expense at having a lower ceili…
If only it _was_ the case!
Sliding in here with the hot take, but Jira can actually be pretty good! Github is terrible at project management.
The problem with Jira (or at least used to) is that it has so much complexities that let people make it overly complicated.