4 ms·

Anyone here used lift and found a level of productvity over Django/Rails/PHP Framework of choice? I find most of the things that make money tend to be boring c

by boyter 16y ago

Anyone here used lift and found a level of productvity over Django/Rails/PHP Framework of choice? I find most of the things that make money tend to be boring crud applications which really don't require much in the way of fancy features which makes one of the main arguements in the article invalid. I am itching to learn something new though but wonder if its going to be worth it or should I turn my attentions to something more mainstream.

ericlavigne 16y ago
What is your strategy for making money with boring crud applications? Consulting? In-house software developer? How much are you earning with this strategy?
- boyter 16y ago
  Consulting and In-House software. Most of them I can throw together in a few hours using any framework I am slightly familar with. As for how much, its on a case by case basis. I charge less for non-profits and people who are generally nice people.
anthonyb 16y ago
From what I can see on the presentation that he links to, there's nothing to warrant the 10x more productive claim. Perhaps he's just doing a bad job of explaining the secret sauce, but I mean really? Shit like: bind("tip", xhtml, "done_checkbox" -> ajaxCheckbox(userStatus.equals(Full(TipUserStatus.done)), (b: Boolean) => { val currentUser = User.currentUser.open_! val evertodo = TipUserBind.find(By(TipUserBind.tipid, this), By(TipUserBind.userid, currentUser)) match { case Full(tub) => tub.delete_!; true case _ => false } makes you 10x more productive? The spreadsheet is also just for JVM frameworks, although some of them are probably MVC too, it's hard to tell. Also, you can really tell that both the parties involved come from heavy corporate backgrounds, with massive tables of features and rating them against each other. A scale of 0, 0.5, 1.0? And then the Lift guy switches to /11? Give me a break...
- aaronblohowiak 16y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven 11 is a joke.
  - anthonyb 16y ago
    Yes, I know. It still doesn't make me want to love his web framework though.
jfager 16y ago
All of my backend work is currently in Scala. I evaluated Lift for a while for my frontend, but I was turned off by it for a few (probably stupid) reasons: 1. The documentation is poor compared to other frameworks, and there's not anywhere near as much collective knowledge around it on the web as with kits like Django or Rails. That isn't entirely bad (you don't have to wade through tons of people who have no idea what they're talking about), but it is frustrating to feel like you're the only one who has ever tried to do something with the code. 2. While they're good about keeping their internal libraries well-factored and independently usable (and I do use a few in other projects), overall, I find the project to be downright overwhelming in its scope. There's just a lot there. They've currently got 131 branches going on github. They implement their own json library, their own actors, their own version of Option, etc, etc. This isn't bad, and for many I'm sure it's actually welcome. For me, though, I value feeling like I 'get' a project, that I understand its scope, what it's providing for me, where it's going, and how to extend it safely myself. I never felt that way with Lift. 3. I don't share their vision on state, or at least the vision they had for a long time. I understand that 2.2 is going to be a lot friendlier for stateless development, though, and that might send me back for another look.

by boyter 16y ago

ericlavigne 16y ago

What is your strategy for making money with boring crud applications? Consulting? In-house software developer? How much are you earning with this strategy?

boyter 16y ago
Consulting and In-House software. Most of them I can throw together in a few hours using any framework I am slightly familar with. As for how much, its on a case by case basis. I charge less for non-profits and people who are generally nice people.

anthonyb 16y ago

From what I can see on the presentation that he links to, there's nothing to warrant the 10x more productive claim. Perhaps he's just doing a bad job of explaining the secret sauce, but I mean really? Shit like: bind("tip", xhtml, "done_checkbox" -> ajaxCheckbox(userStatus.equals(Full(TipUserStatus.done)), (b: Boolean) => { val currentUser = User.currentUser.open_! val evertodo = TipUserBind.find(By(TipUserBind.tipid, this), By(TipUserBind.userid, currentUser)) match { case Full(tub) => tub.delete_!; true case _ => false } makes you 10x more productive? The spreadsheet is also just for JVM frameworks, although some of them are probably MVC too, it's hard to tell. Also, you can really tell that both the parties involved come from heavy corporate backgrounds, with massive tables of features and rating them against each other. A scale of 0, 0.5, 1.0? And then the Lift guy switches to /11? Give me a break...

aaronblohowiak 16y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven 11 is a joke.
- anthonyb 16y ago
  Yes, I know. It still doesn't make me want to love his web framework though.

jfager 16y ago

All of my backend work is currently in Scala. I evaluated Lift for a while for my frontend, but I was turned off by it for a few (probably stupid) reasons: 1. The documentation is poor compared to other frameworks, and there's not anywhere near as much collective knowledge around it on the web as with kits like Django or Rails. That isn't entirely bad (you don't have to wade through tons of people who have no idea what they're talking about), but it is frustrating to feel like you're the only one who has ever tried to do something with the code. 2. While they're good about keeping their internal libraries well-factored and independently usable (and I do use a few in other projects), overall, I find the project to be downright overwhelming in its scope. There's just a lot there. They've currently got 131 branches going on github. They implement their own json library, their own actors, their own version of Option, etc, etc. This isn't bad, and for many I'm sure it's actually welcome. For me, though, I value feeling like I 'get' a project, that I understand its scope, what it's providing for me, where it's going, and how to extend it safely myself. I never felt that way with Lift. 3. I don't share their vision on state, or at least the vision they had for a long time. I understand that 2.2 is going to be a lot friendlier for stateless development, though, and that might send me back for another look.