4 ms·

> If you're telling me that eventually CRUD apps will be mostly automated away, then I believe you. Don't. Read "worse is better" again. In the 90s CRUD apps w

> If you're telling me that eventually CRUD apps will be mostly automated away, then I believe you. Don't. Read "worse is better" again. In the 90s CRUD apps were a solved problem. Then in the 2000-2005 or so they became graphical (access, foxpro, dbase, paradox, filemaker, and yes visual basic and delphi ...) and it was trivial to get CRUD apps done. People who wouldn't know code from Welsh English made databases for libraries, of their CD/DVD collections/... just for fun even. Today, that doesn't happen anymore. And the web frameworks we currently use for that by and large don't work on mobile and even those are losing in the marketplace for reasons I can't understand, but there is a new javascript framework we just GOT to use. CRUD apps these days ... need a web interface, an android one, an ios one, and more. Minimum number of programming languages required: Javascript, Java/Kotlin, ObjC/Swift, and a backend language (can't use Java for that ... that would make ... euhm ... that would make sense ? And yes, you could use even Javascript, but ... so let's use Python ... or Go). And let's just not mention that such absolutely basic things as a data table that were lowest-common-denominator are now exceptional. Sorting by every column ? Rarely happens. Having all data in a single listbox with search, filter, and rapid scrolling ? Unheard of (because very impractical on the web). So no worries about programmer jobs. Ever simpler things will require ever more programmers. Worry about enjoying programming.

ebiester 9y ago
What I wouldn't do for a tool like powerbuilder today... That said, html + css is the wrong tool for applications and we keep jamming that square peg through the round hole.
naasking 9y ago
> In the 90s CRUD apps were a solved problem. Then in the 2000-2005 or so they became graphical (access, foxpro, dbase, paradox, filemaker, and yes visual basic and delphi ...) and it was trivial to get CRUD apps done. Because CRUD apps were for one platform, running purely locally, not dealing with disconnected clients, concurrent clients modifying shared data, unreliable database connections, clients with arbitrary screen dimensions, resolutions and orientations, or in arbitrary human languages. I think you underestimate the scope of modern CRUD applications.
- petra 9y ago
  Sure it's complex. But WordPress works fine. Why can't a crud tool ?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  A lot of that is self-inflicted complexity and following latest business trends (read: mostly hype). Things like opting for distributed cluster and map-reduce where a couple of unix commands piped together, running on a mid-tier laptop would do. Things like going with the latest and greatest web framework, that incidentally pulls in 5-layers deep stack and thousands of dependencies into your workflow. Also related is typical business optimization - which usually means externalizing costs to users. Like, "CRUD apps were for one platform" - the cost of doing them for multiple platforms is at worst linear with the number of platforms, and most of that cost can be moved to a constant factor if you design your architecture correctly. It's a big deal, but it's not always that big of a deal. And contemporary alternatives result in applications sorta-working on multiple platforms at the price of one, but having half (or less) functionality.
  - michaelmrose 9y ago
    The framework is intended as complexity management. Instead of picking each of 20 components each of which has 7 choices with different tradeoffs and figuring out which subset of choices delivers an acceptable complete picture just read how to use the components we have picked for you in a suggested fashion. The result may be complicated under the hood but may be easier to operate as well.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      Problem is, this often backfires - you end up using 5% of the power of the framework, but spending 95% of the dev time fighting it to achieve what you really want.
      - emodendroket 9y ago
        In my experience this is a sign that you've picked a wildly unsuitable framework, rather than that the very concept of a framework is wrong.

ebiester 9y ago

What I wouldn't do for a tool like powerbuilder today... That said, html + css is the wrong tool for applications and we keep jamming that square peg through the round hole.

naasking 9y ago

> In the 90s CRUD apps were a solved problem. Then in the 2000-2005 or so they became graphical (access, foxpro, dbase, paradox, filemaker, and yes visual basic and delphi ...) and it was trivial to get CRUD apps done. Because CRUD apps were for one platform, running purely locally, not dealing with disconnected clients, concurrent clients modifying shared data, unreliable database connections, clients with arbitrary screen dimensions, resolutions and orientations, or in arbitrary human languages. I think you underestimate the scope of modern CRUD applications.

petra 9y ago
Sure it's complex. But WordPress works fine. Why can't a crud tool ?
TeMPOraL 9y ago
A lot of that is self-inflicted complexity and following latest business trends (read: mostly hype). Things like opting for distributed cluster and map-reduce where a couple of unix commands piped together, running on a mid-tier laptop would do. Things like going with the latest and greatest web framework, that incidentally pulls in 5-layers deep stack and thousands of dependencies into your workflow. Also related is typical business optimization - which usually means externalizing costs to users. Like, "CRUD apps were for one platform" - the cost of doing them for multiple platforms is at worst linear with the number of platforms, and most of that cost can be moved to a constant factor if you design your architecture correctly. It's a big deal, but it's not always that big of a deal. And contemporary alternatives result in applications sorta-working on multiple platforms at the price of one, but having half (or less) functionality.
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  The framework is intended as complexity management. Instead of picking each of 20 components each of which has 7 choices with different tradeoffs and figuring out which subset of choices delivers an acceptable complete picture just read how to use the components we have picked for you in a suggested fashion. The result may be complicated under the hood but may be easier to operate as well.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Problem is, this often backfires - you end up using 5% of the power of the framework, but spending 95% of the dev time fighting it to achieve what you really want.
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      In my experience this is a sign that you've picked a wildly unsuitable framework, rather than that the very concept of a framework is wrong.