5 ms·

'This implementation could've been done just as well in straight JavaScript or any other JavaScript framework just as nicely.' I disagree, as I've actually I'v

by rrhyne 17y ago

'This implementation could've been done just as well in straight JavaScript or any other JavaScript framework just as nicely.' I disagree, as I've actually I've tried it in jQuery for an app built on the Titanium platform. It wasn't half as featured as this (drag and drop, multiple item selection with num of items selected display, etc) and it took much more time. Also, the speed wasn't half as fast, but that could be differences between titanium and firfox. I'll know what the speed difference is when I try it in Ti.

asnyder 17y ago
Again, not to frustrate but aside from the Mac interface there's really not much separating this from these examples: http://demos.telerik.com/webmail/ http://demos.telerik.com/webmail/ http://gwt.google.com/samples/Mail/Mail.html http://gwt.google.com/samples/Mail/Mail.html http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_source.html http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_so... I'm sure if I spent a little more time I could easily get you a list of 10 more. Again, I'm not saying that the framework isn't nice, I'm saying we shouldn't be ooh and ahhing.
- rrhyne 17y ago
  I'm ooh ing. I can't help it. But I'm easily impressed. Maybe I won't be when I dive deeper though. Thanks for the other handle on the jug, the devil's avocation and the report about the color of the vegitation other side of the fence.
- tolmasky 17y ago
  This is the same thing that happened with that other framework announced here a few months ago (can't remember the name, but its in the HN archives). The fundamental problem with demos is precisely that there's a good chance someone else has done it already and its hard to tell exactly how well the framework scales up to a real app. Until you start seeing full blown apps with something, its kind of up in the air. This is why we originally did the opposite approach: we launched 280 Slides months before we made Cappuccino public, a real app with users actually creating things. The unfortunate thing is that the "small demo" strategy really does a disservice to the framework itself: usually what happens is that competing frameworks shrug it off because they already have a demo that does the same thing (and thus don't learn from the new innovations being demonstrated), and oftentimes the "general audience" devolves into meaningless discussions about exactly how many lines of code or hours of time more or less it would have taken in some other technology. I offer this as launch advice to anyone (as I did to the other guys here on HN): 1. Make something truly unique 2. The more "real" the better 3. Most importantly show us how you did it: I would love it if new frameworks coming out had little tutorials of these apps or better yet a video showing how the app was made as opposed to saying "it took us X hours and heres the code". You wrote this framework, for all I know you designed this framework specifically for this demo. Show me how you made this and why it was so much easier for you. For example, what we do with Cappuccino is show that you can make a similar interface with Interface Builder and nib2cib in 10 minutes, not 10 hours. If you believe that your selling point is your meta programming or whatever, then show me how it made things better in the process. Again, I honestly haven't looked deeply enough into this to make a reasoned opinion on whether this framework is good or bad, but I see these responses a lot and I think doing the above helps avoid them and to better demonstrate what makes you "special".
  - rrhyne 17y ago
    They have some good videos available. The biggest concern for me, a user considering frameworks is always: 'how long are these guys going to be around'
    - tolmasky 17y ago
      The only videos I found were the screencasts on the bottom. While fine, these only demonstrate basic features, features that again are available pretty much across the board. What I want to see is them putting together this Mail app from scratch, lets have a real start and a real goal. Now, I know many frameworks don't do this, but thats precisely why it would be a huge win to have. Even we don't do this as well as we should. Now, if the reply to this is "but the video would take 10 hours!", then unless your counting time to make the art in photoshop, there's a serious problem. If I were to do a screencast of making that Mail.app interface in Cocoa, it would literally be 10-20 minutes max. Its honestly just drag and dropping the components in in Interface Builder, then setting up the bindings and data sources.
      - sant0sk1 17y ago
        Actually, that'd be a nice screencast to put on cappuccino.org. Perhaps worth the time/effort..
    - boucher 17y ago
      For the most part, open source makes the irrelevant. Not that we are going anywhere, but if we dropped off the face of the planet tomorrow, Cappuccino would go on. We already have a thriving community of contributors and users who rely on Cappuccino for their own businesses, many of whom are more than capable of continuing the frameworks development.
      - papertiger 17y ago
        I don't think open source makes that consideration irrelevant. It is an important factor when choosing a framework. I would bet that most of the users and probably a good portion of the contributors are using a framework precisely because it saves them from spending the time to develop/maintain those features on their own. Cappuccino would go on, but one must acknowledge that it could certainly flounder without the solid direction, organization, and vision that brought it into the world in the first place.
- sjs 17y ago
  I tried dragging & dropping messages in all of those samples and all I got was some highlighted text. I know they're just samples and that is "just one thing", but it's a pretty big difference. If you don't like Uki for some reason that's fine, but you should just say it. Personally I think it looks fairly promising.

by rrhyne 17y ago

asnyder 17y ago

Again, not to frustrate but aside from the Mac interface there's really not much separating this from these examples: http://demos.telerik.com/webmail/ http://demos.telerik.com/webmail/ http://gwt.google.com/samples/Mail/Mail.html http://gwt.google.com/samples/Mail/Mail.html http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_source.html http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/layout/adv_layout_so... I'm sure if I spent a little more time I could easily get you a list of 10 more. Again, I'm not saying that the framework isn't nice, I'm saying we shouldn't be ooh and ahhing.

rrhyne 17y ago
I'm ooh ing. I can't help it. But I'm easily impressed. Maybe I won't be when I dive deeper though. Thanks for the other handle on the jug, the devil's avocation and the report about the color of the vegitation other side of the fence.
tolmasky 17y ago
This is the same thing that happened with that other framework announced here a few months ago (can't remember the name, but its in the HN archives). The fundamental problem with demos is precisely that there's a good chance someone else has done it already and its hard to tell exactly how well the framework scales up to a real app. Until you start seeing full blown apps with something, its kind of up in the air. This is why we originally did the opposite approach: we launched 280 Slides months before we made Cappuccino public, a real app with users actually creating things. The unfortunate thing is that the "small demo" strategy really does a disservice to the framework itself: usually what happens is that competing frameworks shrug it off because they already have a demo that does the same thing (and thus don't learn from the new innovations being demonstrated), and oftentimes the "general audience" devolves into meaningless discussions about exactly how many lines of code or hours of time more or less it would have taken in some other technology. I offer this as launch advice to anyone (as I did to the other guys here on HN): 1. Make something truly unique 2. The more "real" the better 3. Most importantly show us how you did it: I would love it if new frameworks coming out had little tutorials of these apps or better yet a video showing how the app was made as opposed to saying "it took us X hours and heres the code". You wrote this framework, for all I know you designed this framework specifically for this demo. Show me how you made this and why it was so much easier for you. For example, what we do with Cappuccino is show that you can make a similar interface with Interface Builder and nib2cib in 10 minutes, not 10 hours. If you believe that your selling point is your meta programming or whatever, then show me how it made things better in the process. Again, I honestly haven't looked deeply enough into this to make a reasoned opinion on whether this framework is good or bad, but I see these responses a lot and I think doing the above helps avoid them and to better demonstrate what makes you "special".
- rrhyne 17y ago
  They have some good videos available. The biggest concern for me, a user considering frameworks is always: 'how long are these guys going to be around'
  - tolmasky 17y ago
    The only videos I found were the screencasts on the bottom. While fine, these only demonstrate basic features, features that again are available pretty much across the board. What I want to see is them putting together this Mail app from scratch, lets have a real start and a real goal. Now, I know many frameworks don't do this, but thats precisely why it would be a huge win to have. Even we don't do this as well as we should. Now, if the reply to this is "but the video would take 10 hours!", then unless your counting time to make the art in photoshop, there's a serious problem. If I were to do a screencast of making that Mail.app interface in Cocoa, it would literally be 10-20 minutes max. Its honestly just drag and dropping the components in in Interface Builder, then setting up the bindings and data sources.
    - sant0sk1 17y ago
      Actually, that'd be a nice screencast to put on cappuccino.org. Perhaps worth the time/effort..
  - boucher 17y ago
    For the most part, open source makes the irrelevant. Not that we are going anywhere, but if we dropped off the face of the planet tomorrow, Cappuccino would go on. We already have a thriving community of contributors and users who rely on Cappuccino for their own businesses, many of whom are more than capable of continuing the frameworks development.
    - papertiger 17y ago
      I don't think open source makes that consideration irrelevant. It is an important factor when choosing a framework. I would bet that most of the users and probably a good portion of the contributors are using a framework precisely because it saves them from spending the time to develop/maintain those features on their own. Cappuccino would go on, but one must acknowledge that it could certainly flounder without the solid direction, organization, and vision that brought it into the world in the first place.
sjs 17y ago
I tried dragging & dropping messages in all of those samples and all I got was some highlighted text. I know they're just samples and that is "just one thing", but it's a pretty big difference. If you don't like Uki for some reason that's fine, but you should just say it. Personally I think it looks fairly promising.